We performed a comparison between Azure Web Application Firewall and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has good dashboards."
"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn. It's cloud-based, so you don't need to buy or maintain any hardware infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"We have become more aware of what services our users are using, how often they are using them, and what data is being sent out of the organization and to which services. So, it is really a lot about visibility and helping us make decisions based on that. It drives some of our policy decisions for adding extra security controls."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of management. It's important."
"It does a great job of monitoring and maintaining a security baseline. For us, that is a key element. The notifications are pretty good."
"Defender's integration with our identity solutions is critical in our current setup."
"The most valuable feature is the alerting system."
"There are a lot of features with benefits, including discovery, investigation, and putting controls around things. You can't say that you like the investigation part but not the discovery. Everything is correlated; that's how the tool works."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its monitoring."
"In Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, there is an option to enable files. Once you enable that, it will give you all the files in your organization and where they are located in the cloud... That feature is very useful for investigation purposes."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The management can be improved."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"I would say that Azure's customer service is not that good...I am not very happy with the support offered."
"It takes some time to scan and apply the policies when there is some sensitive information. After it applies the policies, it works, but there is a delay. This is something for which we are working with Microsoft."
"There are challenges with detection and there are challenges with false-positive rates."
"We sometimes get errors when we create policies, which is somewhat annoying because some policies stop working due to misconfigurations. We find this challenging because it limits our options for troubleshooting an issue."
"Sometimes the support is actually lacking."
"They should continue integration with all other Microsoft security-related products. The integration with all the other products is still ongoing."
"It doesn't actually decrease the time to respond. This has been an issue with Microsoft recently. Sometimes, there is a delay when it comes to getting an alert policy email... Sometimes it takes two or three hours for that email to be sent."
"The response time could be better. It will be helpful if the alerts are even more proactive and we can see more data. Currently, the data is a little bit weak. It is not complete. I can't just see it and completely know which user or which device it is. It takes some effort and time on my part to investigate and isolate a user. It would be great if it is more user-friendly or easy for people to understand."
"The interface needs to be more user-friendly."
More Azure Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Web Application Firewall is ranked 18th in Microsoft Security Suite with 9 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is ranked 10th in Microsoft Security Suite with 30 reviews. Azure Web Application Firewall is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Web Application Firewall writes "It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps writes "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need". Azure Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door, Azure Firewall and F5 Advanced WAF, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Qualys VMDR. See our Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.
