We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiWeb and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The WAF profiles has been effective at mitigating web-based threats."
"Security Fabric integration. This is really a value-added feature as FortiWeb can interact with the rest of the client’s Fortinet pack to provide an intelligent security layer like (FortiSIEM for central log management and correlation, FortiGate, FortiSandbox for malware analysis, etc.)."
"The most valuable feature is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"The most valuable features are support and security."
"The most valuable feature is ease of use."
"Some of the threat detection analytics and the filtering capabilities they give us for filtering a certain type of information that we don't want coming into the site are its valuable features. The analytics are pretty good in terms of being able to see what threats have been detected and mitigated, where they're coming from, and things like that."
"It's easy to use and allows us to integrate solutions together."
"FortiWeb offers a good price for the marketplace. In the Sri Lankan market, it's hard to find high-end products that can match FortiWeb's pricing. For high-end solutions, the price is always extremely high."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"The most valuable feature is WAF."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is traffic management."
"We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities."
"For advanced users, it would be really useful to have access and the ability to manipulate packets. If we can access and manipulate the contents of packets, even encrypted packets... that would be powerful. Since we're looking at packets arriving at our network, we would have the private key to access those packets and their information."
"They can introduce a scaled-down version for the SMB market. It would be very competitive in the environment."
"The memory use in each of the appliances is problematic."
"It would also be helpful if they could introduce easier reporting. It's good to have those reports that go to C-level management, and Fortinet does provide some graphs, but if they went into some more detail, that would be great."
"Fortinet FortiWeb is not scalable. You'll need more budget to change the hardware."
"The dashboards are not that configurable. Application-specific dashboards can be improved. If we have 50 applications, there should be something to see what's happening with these 50 applications. There could be a graph or a consolidated alert page where all alerts are inbuilt. They have other products that I can use, but this feature should be built into FortiWeb."
"In my experience, Fortinet FortiWeb could improve the intelligent features to acknowledge whether any threat or incident that's running happened. Then give us the ability to escalate it to layer 2 or layer 3 in the network operations."
"FortiWeb needs to have support for the newest technology being used in web applications."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"The product's performance should be better."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Fortinet FortiOS, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and NGINX App Protect. See our Fortinet FortiWeb vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
