We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector 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 product has a good user interface."
"Traffic filtering and WAF are valuable."
"We are getting security for each and every API."
"They have a fantastic tool for analyzing and viewing your traffic."
"The product has a good UI."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"Akamai Web Application Protector is a good solution that provides basic web application protection."
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."
"We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities."
"The production is a valuable feature."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is traffic management."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"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."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"Akamai needs to focus on quickly responding to risks, even those that may potentially be of zero threat..Maybe some of the documentation is a little confusing. They have a lot of different places where you can go to get information, and some of the information is quite out of date."
"Could integrate more features for each security."
"A lot of piracy happens in India and other countries. If there is a product for protection from piracy, it would be great. For example, there are multiple hackers that hack your event, and there are some channels that pirate and publish the event on some other website. We protect our streaming through DRM and different technologies. We are also protecting the website, but hacking is still happening. If they can work on protecting from piracy, it would be great."
"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."
"It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."
"I do not see any area for improvement. Akamai is already maintaining its own databases for the security concerns, vulnerabilities, and attacks that are there. If anything, they should have a solution in the infrastructure security area as well. They should not be only in cloud cybersecurity; they should also be in infrastructure security."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"Customer support has room for improvement."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"The product's performance should be better."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 9th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. 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 Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, AWS WAF, Prolexic, AWS Shield and Cloudflare, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Fortinet FortiWeb. See our Akamai App and API Protector 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.