We performed a comparison between Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service 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 solution can be used for threat prevention or as a cloud-to-cloud backup system"
"It provides an ease of policy management."
"The product's bot protection feature is valuable for our company."
"The most valuable features of the solution are it is plug and play, has automated policies, a simple configuration, and is easy to create rules."
"I like its ability to identify known attacks, including DDOS attacks. It's valuable because software must be able to stop known attacks. Application attacks are evolving all the time. When it comes to software-as-a-service, we need to have software that knows about all the latest attacks. It should also protect against major unknown attacks."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"The solution provides great automation and it is easy to upgrade service."
"It has a filter available, although we are not currently using it because it is not part of our requirements. But it is a good option and when it becomes part of our requirements we will definitely use it."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"The solution can improve by bundling Security Operation Center (SOC) with the WAF-as-a-Service, it would provide a lot more value to customers."
"We found it a bit slow when accessing it through the web browser. The URL also exposed the user name and the hashed password. When I log into my Barracuda WAF user portal, I could see the username and the hashed password on the URL itself. So, it is not very secure, and it is important to take that off."
"The stability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It's a very specific solution that is only requested for a customer's web code or their global IT policy."
"One significant area for improvement in Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service lies in its market positioning and pricing strategy."
"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."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"The support can be improved when you are configuring the system rules. The Disaster Recovery feature can be added in the next release. The price of the solution can be reduced a bit."
"The product's performance should be better."
"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."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is ranked 29th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 5 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is rated 7.2, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service writes "Easy to install platform with valuable policy management features ". 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 WAF-as-a-Service is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service 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.