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 customers are very happy with this solution because of two things. First, the IPS integration with a web application is very tightly done on Fortinet. Second, the ease of use is there. The management interface or the GUI interface is very easy to use, configure, and manage. These are the two main valuable features. It supports integration with other Fortinet products. It also integrates very well with the firewall and sandboxing technology. They already have enough integration with different technologies. They have got a complete tech intelligence view of the whole product."
"The solution has a good sandbox feature."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiWeb is the ease of integration and configuration."
"When we had Cisco we had around thirty thousand entries on our firewalls. Now we are down to three thousand. Fortinet has a mechanism to detect all of your entries which are not used, and it can clean it up."
"The most valuable feature is the attack signature and machine learning."
"High-performance and detection engines, provide a high rate of exposure of web attacks."
"I like FortiWeb's usability and ease of configuration. It's simple to configure rules and exceptions inside the attack log. We block everything by default. If something isn't working, we ask the system admin to adjust the template and add exceptions."
"One main feature we are very happy about is file security and upload functionality."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"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 simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"The solution's integration is very good."
"It does an excellent job of load balancing."
"If the price was lower, it would be a bit more attractive, as an option, to the customers."
"We want to see more detailed logging, such as audit logging, as this would significantly enhance the solution's reporting. We currently get some information from logs, but more would be better."
"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."
"A user interface or dashboard for troubleshooting is needed."
"I would like to see the Application Delivery Control (ADC) and Web Application Firewall (WAF) combined in one device."
"I had some small problems when I was upgrading firmware. After the upgrade, some of my certificates were deleted."
"They could improve their support a little bit for faster response time."
"The upgrade process could be a bit smoother."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."
"The working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"Microsoft needs to work on their documentation."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"The solution is easy to use overall, but the dashboard could be updated with a better layout and graphical design so that we can see the data a bit easier. Microsoft could also add more documentation. The documentation Microsoft provides doesn't tell us about resource requirements. We found that the instances we had weren't sufficient to support the firewall, so we had to increase them."
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 41 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 F5 Advanced WAF, Citrix NetScaler, AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall 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.
