We performed a comparison between Airlock and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), F5, Microsoft and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"It does an excellent job of load balancing."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"Application Gateway automatically redirects unwanted users and takes care of the security aspect. It also handles the performance side of things, which is why we use it."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway are the policies, the data store they are using, and the cloud platform it operates on."
"The solution provides great automation and it is easy to upgrade service."
"The tool must be simplified."
"It is a bit tricky to configure. You've got to have a very specific format to configure it. They should make it a little bit easier to configure. Mapping the certificates into it isn't easy, and it could be better. Currently, you've to write a bit of automation to pull certificates directly to HTTPS."
"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."
"The working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"The support can be improved when you are configuring the system rules. The Disaster Recovery feature can be added in the next release. The price of the solution can be reduced a bit."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Airlock is ranked 22nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 41 reviews. Airlock is rated 10.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Airlock writes "Provides endless features and can be adapted to every single application that exists in the world". 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". Airlock is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Human Defense Platform, Citrix Web App and API Protection and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Citrix NetScaler, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall.
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.
