We performed a comparison between Barracuda Web Application Firewall 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."You don't need help from Barracuda to help with the deployment. The deployment is easy."
"Our customers value the solution's simplicity."
"The solution offers multiple security features. There are machine learning features and great URL encryption. It also offers multi-protocol support against DDoS attacks."
"The installation is straightforward."
"This product gives us visibility into what is going on in two servers, including connections and sessions, real-time alerts, very good reporting, and KPIs. It makes managing security of a critical server very easy, with a friendly GUI."
"The stability of the solution is good. I don't think we've experienced bugs, crashes, or glitches."
"There is no one special feature, but the WAF itself is valuable: user-friendly protection against web attacks etc., authentication, reporting, accountability, alerting, and hardened OS."
"We run it with no downtime, because it has good support."
"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 is easy to set up."
"Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway gives us a lot of benefits, including domain mapping."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"We get false positives about phishing emails."
"I would like to see a native multi-cloud cover."
"Its interface can be better. It is not very friendly."
"I would suggest that someone implementing this product is knowledgeable in the IT field, and with the network needs. It is complex."
"There are issues when upgrading firewalls and we experience different issues across customers."
"I have found F5 more stable than Barracuda Web Application Firewall. They should improve the stability."
"The incident reporting needs to be improved."
"This product could easily progress to be among the industry leaders. I think they need to improve enterprise level automation. It integrates with a small number of vulnerability scanners, so report results should be imported manually; same for SIEM integration."
"The solution could improve by increasing the performance when doing updates. For example, if I change the certificate it can take 30 minutes. Other vendors do not have this type of problem."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"I believe that there is room for improvement in terms of additional functionality. It is an advantage to have features readily available for configuration without needing customer-defined rules."
"The pricing of the solution is a bit high. The solution should offer different pricing systems."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway could improve by allowing features to use more third-party tools."
More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 14th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises". 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". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster and Radware Alteon, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF and Azure Front Door. See our Barracuda Web Application Firewall 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.