We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and Azure Front Door 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."They have a fantastic tool for analyzing and viewing your traffic."
"It enables us to move faster with new products because we have this layer of protection set up in our infrastructure."
"We are getting security for each and every API."
"The most valuable feature is the custom rules feature. This is because many of our customers require a lot of custom rules. Because it's a very customized project for our customers, I think they have the best of everything already."
"The CDN and the WAF features are the best."
"The features are powerful and better than F5."
"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 solution easily identifies, delays, or allows business traffic."
"The most valuable feature is that you can implement resources globally. It does not depend on location and ability or something like that. This is to connect clients around the world."
"Rules Engine is a valuable feature."
"It inspects the traffic at the network level before it comes into Azure. We can do SSL offloading, and it can detect abnormalities before the traffic comes into the application. It can be used globally and is easy to set up. It is also quite stable and scalable."
"The web application firewall is a great feature."
"Has a great application firewall and we like the security."
"I am impressed with the tool's integrations."
"The price is one of the most important aspects of the product. It's quite affordable."
"I particularly appreciate its load-balancing capabilities as it allows us to manage multiple instances and support a global presence effectively."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"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."
"In terms of precedence of Akamai rules, the last one is implemented. That is the one that is operational. If two rules contradict, the last one is implemented. We had a clash, but it was really tough to find that out. I would like to have a rulebook because, in their architecture documentation, it is not mentioned anywhere that if two rules clash, the last one works, and if it does not work, then what to do. This is something we were debating today with their tech support. With AWS, we get documents for the issues so that they do not occur in the future. Akamai's support and knowledge base needs to be improved."
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved."
"The custom rules must be improved."
"If we talk about application layer attacks, including WAF, CloudFlare is leading. Akamai can focus a bit more on the application layer attacks and how to protect them."
"Customer support has room for improvement."
"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."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"My suggestion for improvement would be to enhance the Data Export feature to include specific tables, particularly the Azure Diagnostics table."
"The product needs to improve its latency."
"It lacks sufficient functionality."
"I'm responsible for the governance and cost control of Azure. I'm not a specialist in any products and therefore I couldn't really speak effectively to features that are lacking or missing."
"There's a limitation on the amount of global rules we can add."
"There is room for improvement and they're working on it."
"This is a relatively expensive solution."
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while Azure Front Door is ranked 9th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Azure Front Door is rated 8.8. 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 Azure Front Door writes " An easy -to-setup stable solution that enables implementing resources globally and has a good technical support team". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and AWS Shield, whereas Azure Front Door is most compared with Amazon CloudFront, Cloudflare, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai and AWS Global Accelerator. See our Akamai App and API Protector vs. Azure Front Door 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.