We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and NSFOCUS Web Application Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon, Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"The tool helps manage microservices by providing developers with a platform to conduct tests and assessments on the web application. The custom domain option is one of the most valuable features I've found. This feature is incredibly helpful for the end-users of the web application. With the custom domain feature, you can change the lengthy link to a shorter, more memorable one. For example, instead of using a lengthy default link, you can customize it to something like imail.com, which is much easier to remember and share."
"The pricing is quite good."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of 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 solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"Since we are using this tool for protection purposes we really appreciate the hybrid security abilities; the main idea here is that we powerful protection our application needs."
"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 takes a lot of time for a certificate to update in the system. That is a huge drawback, affecting the load-balancing side. And when there are changes to the load balancing, it affects the end-user."
"The product's performance should be better."
"The solution has many limitations. You cannot upgrade the VPN to the application gateway. So I started with version one, which has limited capabilities, and they provided version two. And unfortunately, I cannot upgrade from v one to v two like other services. So I have to decommission the version one and create a new one with version two. Also the version one was complex with the certificates uploading the SQL certificates."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"There is a need for expanded licensing terms and options. There's also a need for improved and more agile customization features. The user needs to be able to manage each policy as required; the functionality needs to empower the user. There should be a complete suite of desktop provider policies available to users. Overall, it needs to be more user-friendly."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while NSFOCUS Web Application Firewall is ranked 40th in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2, while NSFOCUS Web Application Firewall is rated 7.0. 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 NSFOCUS Web Application Firewall writes "Offers Application Protection Against Web Attacks". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and AWS WAF, whereas NSFOCUS Web Application Firewall is most compared with .
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.