We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks 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."I like the tool's stability and performance."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway gives us a lot of benefits, including domain mapping."
"The pricing is quite good."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"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."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is traffic management."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"The first aspect that is important is the fact that Prisma Cloud is cloud-agnostic. It's actually available for the five top cloud providers: AWS, GCP, Azure, Oracle, and Alibaba Cloud. The second aspect is the fact that we can write our own rules to try to detect misconfigurations in those environments."
"It helps to identify the misconfigurations by monitoring regularly which helps to secure the organization's cloud environment."
"CSPM is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features of Prisma Cloud are its cloud security posture management and cloud workload protection capabilities."
"I find the CSPM area to be a more valuable and flexible feature."
"It scans our containers in real time. Also, as they're built, it's looking into the container repository where the images are built, telling us ahead of time, "You have vulnerabilities here, and you should update this code before you deploy." And once it's deployed, it's scanning for vulnerabilities that are in production as the container is running."
"This solution helped us by allowing us to schedule and fix things. This is not an easy thing if you're managing 1,000 plus resources."
"It has helped us understand the dynamic topology of our containers, and manage security through the application of policies that our pipelines apply straight from Git."
"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"The pricing of the solution is a bit high. The solution should offer different pricing systems."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"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."
"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."
"They could improve more features for the enterprise version of the solution."
"We would like it to have more features from the risk and compliance perspectives."
"There are hundreds of built-in policies for AWS and Azure, but GCP and Oracle are not covered as much as AWS. There is a lot of work to do on that part. There is, obviously, a tiny bit of favoritism towards AWS because it has the most market share."
"They charge seven workloads for monitoring one compute, and that is quite expensive. This makes it difficult to move fully with the compute part because of the workload."
"This solution is more AWS and Azure-centric. It needs to be more specific on the GCP side, which they are working on."
"The UI could use some improvement; we usually find the information we're looking for, but what fields can be clicked on and what workflow to follow to get the required information is not always evident. Sometimes we're all over the place, clicking around to drill in and uncover the alert and investigation details we're looking for."
"Areas like the deployment of their defenders and their central control need manual intervention. They should focus more on automation. They have a very generic case for small companies. However, for bigger companies to work, we have to do a lot of changes to our system to accommodate it. Therefore, they should change their system or deployment models so it can be easy to integrate into existing architectures."
"I think Prisma Cloud could improve its preventive governance policy and CWP run time modules."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews while Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 5th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 82 reviews. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2, while Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "The dashboard is very user-friendly and can be used to generate custom RQL based on user requirements". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, AWS Security Hub and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security. See our Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks 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.
