Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon, Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF).
To learn more, read our detailed Web Application Firewall (WAF) Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs.""I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily.""The solution provides great automation and it is easy to upgrade service.""I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks.""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.""It does an excellent job of load balancing.""The most valuable feature of the solution is traffic management."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pros →

"The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis."

More R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) Pros →

Cons
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM.""One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS.""Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful.""The monitoring on the solution could be better.""For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved.""The solution is easy to use overall, but the dashboard could be updated with a better layout and graphical design so that we can see the data a bit easier. Microsoft could also add more documentation. The documentation Microsoft provides doesn't tell us about resource requirements. We found that the instances we had weren't sufficient to support the firewall, so we had to increase them.""The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly.""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."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Cons →

"The area that should be improved is licensing."

More R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is not expensive."
  • "Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."
  • "Between v1 and v2, there is a lot of change in the pricing. It is very costly compared to AWS."
  • "There is some additional cost, such as extended support."
  • "The cost is not an issue."
  • "The solution is reasonably priced compared to other solutions."
  • "The pricing is based on how much you use the solution."
  • "The solution is paid monthly. The solution is highly expensive."
  • More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the… more »
    Top Answer:Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit for… more »
    Top Answer:We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled.
    Top Answer:Imperva is a strong choice, given their security focus and ongoing R&D into the product in areas such as bot management.
    Ranking
    Views
    15,386
    Comparisons
    13,331
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    366
    Rating
    7.5
    Views
    545
    Comparisons
    255
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
    Rohde & Schwarz Web Application Firewall, R&S WAF, DenyAll Web Application Security
    Learn More
    Overview

    Azure Application Gateway is a web traffic load balancer that enables you to manage traffic to your web applications. Traditional load balancers operate at the transport layer (OSI layer 4 - TCP and UDP) and route traffic based on source IP address and port, to a destination IP address and port.

    To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.

    Beyond the basic capabilities of traditional negative and positive security models, DenyAll’s scoring mechanism, user behavior tracking and advanced detection engines deliver best-of-breed security that won’t let you down. None of our customers have made the headlines with security breaches.

    Web Services and automated machine-to-machine communications support business processes, internal and with ecosystem partners that are often critical. DenyAll makes it easy to optimize and secure these XML-based data flows, with capabilities found in no other WAF or SOA Gateway.

    Sample Customers
    Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
    Information Not Available
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company28%
    Comms Service Provider20%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Government7%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business40%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise64%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise66%
    Buyer's Guide
    Web Application Firewall (WAF)
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon, Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is ranked 27th in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2, while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is rated 9.0. 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 R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) writes "Geo-localization and IP reputation help to keep our clients secure and more available". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and AWS WAF, whereas R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is most compared with AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Akamai App and API Protector.

    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.