We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector 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 solution easily identifies, delays, or allows business traffic."
"I have contacted the support team of Akamai... I am happy with their responses and answers to my problems."
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"The product has a good UI."
"The dashboard is the most interesting feature of the Akamai portal where you can have a detailed analysis of all the attacks that are happening. You can drill down an issue and see exactly what is happening, who are the bad guys attacking your website, and how Akamai is protecting the website. That is the most valuable feature."
"All the solution's features are very good."
"The product has a good user interface."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"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."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"We find it valuable because it is compatible with our existing Azure solution."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"Customer support has room for improvement."
"The product should provide a secure NTP."
"The WAF features definitely have a lot of room for improvement. A lot of the WAF is really basic. For some products or some of our solutions, we need to run a second layer of more advanced WAF. If it had better layer seven protection then we would not need a second WAF."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"There are some issues with pushing configurations across a network. It still takes about 20 minutes and that means to retract it's another 20 minutes."
"One thing I asked them is to integrate the API discovery product that they have and push that data into Akamai App and API Protector so that we do not have two types of reviews to identify the type of traffic. We already know the APIs that are frequently getting used, so analysis becomes easier. We can integrate both products and use them."
"The performance of the cloud monitoring tool is low."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"The product's performance should be better."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules."
"The working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"The increased security that we are considering is because of some of the things that the security team has brought to our attention. They have pointed out that we would most likely require a better web application firewall than Azure Application Gateway."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Akamai App and API Protector writes "Easy to learn and gives us a report of traffic". 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". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, AWS WAF, Prolexic, AWS Shield and Arbor DDoS, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Fortinet FortiWeb. See our Akamai App and API Protector 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.