Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Reviews

We are using Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's Web Application Firewall feature, which includes the ability for OWASP Top 10 vulnerability discovery that blocks any traffic that is identified as vulnerable. It blocks the traffic if something is exposed or identified by the WAF. There are custom rules and managed rules that we can enable, and if we identify that some legitimate traffic is a false positive, we can tune it accordingly. These features are important whenever a URL is exposed over public internet.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has helped manage our traffic efficiently because we have many web services that we can put behind the same URL, and we can have different URLs with the same Application Gateway with a limited number of listeners. We can do host-based routing as well as URL-based routing or path-based routing. It supports both, so we can have even a single URL supporting many applications, or we can have different URLs for different applications respectively. We have both use cases.

How well Microsoft Azure Application Gateway performs depends on whether we know in advance the required capacity, in which case we can hard-code it. Otherwise, it has the autoscaling feature, so there is not much concern around performance; it can scale significantly.

Positive

We decided to switch from the previous solutions to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway for the ease of automation and a quicker go-to-market. Setting up F5 took a considerable amount of time, and we also needed specialized people for the F5 knowledge, which comes with licensing costs. Although Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is more expensive than F5, sharing the infrastructure or resources makes it a favorable option.

We use both Application Gateway's host-based and path-based routing.

I think Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is already up to the market standard, so I do not have any suggestions on how it can still be improved. It is a service by Microsoft that we are using, and it is a security product. I believe it is up to the mark, as Microsoft security is bulletproof. For now, our requirements are sufficiently handled by the product, and we have been automating everything, so we hardly use the UI.

We use integration with Azure Active Directory in the organization.

Using Azure Active Directory has impacted our authentication process positively; we are using SSO and for the cloud hosting services, we are using AD authentication to access some of the VMs and everything. This means we do not have to remember passwords for different virtual machines hosted on the cloud. That way, it has helped a lot. We use single sign-on to get into VMs. My overall rating for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is seven out of ten.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Application Gateway for a period of more than 10 years, but not in one application. I am a solution architect and I recommend API gateway to use in customer products.

We are partners because we work as solution providers to customers. As part of that, we recommend solutions.

My clients are all big customers across the globe, basically financial services clients.

The best features for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway basically protect your application and provide security-related features and also divert the traffic to different instances of your application.

I have used URL-based routing, which helps manage traffic efficiency. It is a bit hard to manage in the long run, but it does provide value.

I have used the gateway's Web Application Firewall feature, which enhances security as it is the first entry point to your network from the outside world. It helps protect against unwanted requests and other threats that can be configured.

Regarding the integration with Azure Active Directory, it helps with authentication processes to configure all the users or the groups.

The monitoring capabilities on Azure provide insight into application performance and potential threats because monitoring comes with many products. On Azure, you have Azure Monitor itself to help you monitor the application by collecting data. You have Application Insights and the logging workspace on Azure. By combining these three, you can implement monitoring solutions on Azure applications.

Auto-scaling is important because it helps in resource management for customers. Scaling is one of the key features of moving to cloud for any customer. During peak times or special events, such as retail site promotions, user load increases significantly. To address this, based on the number of incoming requests or server capacities such as CPU and memory, you can automatically identify these peak scenarios and configure either scaling up or down automatically based on certain parameters.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has room for improvement because it offers many features, but its configuration is a bit difficult, at least from the developer point of view.

There are multiple scenarios in which you can configure a product as an entry point. There is another gateway, APIM, which also acts as an entry point to protect your APIs in special scenarios.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Application Gateway for a period of more than 10 years.

The deployment can be easy if you follow automation infrastructure as code, but if you do it manually, then it becomes challenging.

The stability is good, and except for a few instances, I don't see the non-availability of Azure Cloud services.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a scalable solution, and from my experience, I would rate it as nine out of ten.

I would rate Microsoft support as good because they have a very skilled technical support team in the background and usually respond in one to two days, depending on the ticket priority based on the SLA. I have experienced very good support.

Positive

Regarding the pricing for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I cannot provide details as I am not aware of the current pricing structure.

I would recommend this product to other users based on the need because it helps to divert or route the traffic and also provides security. If those are the scenarios, I definitely would recommend.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway a 9 overall.

We typically use Microsoft Azure Application Gateway for our website applications and also for our application that was published through cloud.

There are a lot of things I appreciate about Microsoft Azure Application Gateway.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is beneficial for us as it helps in publishing our website, providing us comfort when it comes to the availability of our applications.

The autoscaling feature in Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very obvious, and I have no issues with it; it is well planned and organized.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway impacts our cost savings while maintaining higher performance.

The Web Application Firewall (WAF) in Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has been very effective in protecting applications from security threats.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway helps us manage our AI-driven applications by enabling faster transactions, improving our work.

I actually still want to improve my understanding of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, so I have no specific comments for improvements.

In future releases of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I would to see more AI functionalities and a better dashboard as well as some customizations.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Application Gateway for approximately one to two months.

Deploying Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is not that easy, but it is somewhat understandable because it is well-guided during installation.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a very scalable product.

I would rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway an eight out of ten for scalability.

I would rate Microsoft's technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

Before using Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I worked with on-premises solutions.

The installation of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway was completed by three people: my DevOps officer and my system administrator.

The installation took us approximately four to five hours for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway significantly impacts our cost savings while maintaining higher performance.

It helps to save our expenses by approximately 30 to 40%.

When it comes to pricing for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I would rate it a seven out of ten.

I have not evaluated any other options aside from Microsoft Azure Application Gateway.

I highly recommend Microsoft Azure Application Gateway to other organizations.

I would rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway in general as a nine out of ten.

We are using it for our internal application development. We are testing those features of application gateways. We are integrating it with our solutions, application, Azure Application Gateway.

Microsoft has a vast variety of tools, and it blends very well. It provides a range of services, so it integrates well with other solutions. We are using it for some of the security features for our applications, particularly for securing traffic in transit with SSL.

I have not used Azure Application Gateway extensively, so I can't comment deeply on areas for improvement. However, the user interface could be better. There is room for improvement in terms of support, such as assigning agents directly for more straightforward engagement.

We have been using the solution for almost a year.

I rate stability nine points out of ten. It has been stable.

I find it to be definitely scalable.

Customer service can be improved. There is room for improvement, specifically in paid support, by providing more direct contact. The response time can be enhanced.

Positive

We simply use Microsoft.

Microsoft offers a very good range of tutorials and guides, so the setup process is supported well. One person was enough for the initial setup.

One person was enough to do it.

We have seen a return on investment in terms of time-saving and cost-saving by not creating our own infrastructure. It could be about 40%.

Azure solutions are quite expensive. Most services are on a yearly basis. As for pricing, I rate it as nine out of ten. It is quite expensive.

I rate the overall solution as seven out of ten based on the user interface, paid support issues, and the pricing. There are no other concerns besides these.

I have been using the solution to publish applications on the web. 

The tool is easy to use and quite flexible. It has policy management features as well. The solution screens all traffic to our web applications before passing it to the application. We recently tested it on one of our poorly developed applications, and the upgrade gave us a 100% result based on our tests. It's very effective as a security measure, and people can detect threats even through the web application.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is not scalable.

I have been using the product for five years. 

I haven't encountered any stability issues. 

We already use Microsoft Azure. Hence, it was logical to use existing services. 

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's deployment is easy and can be completed in an hour. You only need one engineer to do it. It's a Microsoft service; you need a username to start. You might need some networking knowledge to set it up, but it's very easy. Microsoft handles the maintenance. 

The tool adds great value for money because fewer people are needed to manage the infrastructure. Since the vendor maintains it, we save a lot of time. The biggest issue with the cloud is managing costs when setting up infrastructure. Sometimes, people set up infrastructure without proper approval, leading to unplanned expenses. However, the ease of setting up infrastructure is also a major factor in controlling costs.

The solution's pricing is not complex. It is not expensive from our point of view. 

We plan to do POC on Copilot and Azure OpenAI. I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten. 

If you're considering using this tool, I have some advice. We were very happy with the product until we faced issues with a particular upgrade, which was more due to internal politics than the product itself.

Spinning up multiple IP addresses shouldn't be a problem for a typical company with good internal teams. Our issue was that all our external data traffic pointed to a single upgrade, leading to limitations. However, Microsoft allows frequent updates, so there's no limitation.

Overall, it's a great product, and I recommend it.

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.

It also comes with a DNS feature. The tool is easy to integrate with other platforms. 

Areas for Improvement:
1. Simplified Configuration: The setup process can be complex, especially with WAF, URL-based routing, and listener configurations. A more intuitive UI or guided setup wizard would help.

2. Logging & Monitoring: Diagnostic logs are useful but not real-time. Better integration with Azure Monitor or clearer alerts would improve issue tracking.

3. Cost Optimization: Pricing is on the higher side for small/mid-scale workloads. More flexible pricing models or scaling options would help a lot.

I have been using the tool for a year. 

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is stable. 

The tool is scalable. My company has two users. 

I haven't contacted technical support yet. 

Alternatives and Advice:

Yes, we previously used Azure Load Balancer for basic traffic distribution. However, we switched to Azure Application Gateway because we needed advanced features like:

- URL-based routing

- Web Application Firewall (WAF) integration

- SSL termination

The move was mainly driven by the need for application-layer (Layer 7) routing and better security features, which weren't available in the Load Balancer.

Azure Application Gateway is a powerful tool best suited for medium to large-scale deployments. For smaller or budget-sensitive projects in India

Yes but Azure Application Gateway struck the right balance between built-in security, Layer 7 routing, native Azure integration, and managed infrastructure, making it the most suitable choice for our needs.

In our setup, we host our web application on Azure. Our developer team manages the development and maintenance of the application. When it comes to resource management and scalability features, there can be noticeable impacts on website performance based on the subscription level. For instance, with the basic subscription, the response time of your website may be slower compared to higher-tier subscriptions like premium. I rate the overall product a six out of ten. 

I use Application Gateway because I need to integrate different resource management. In one project, I had two to three applications to integrate using the API Gateway for security and networking solutions.

The solution integrates different applications and APIs securely, enhancing overall security and network optimization.

It creates security, manages installations, and integrates different applications and solutions. It is flexible and scalable, provides better business solutions and controlled versions, improved security, and comprehensive documentation.

The solution needs improvements in integrating different services and creating a better application balance.

It is scalable, allowing integrations with different cloud platforms like GCP and AWS, and creating varied environments in the Azure platform.

Microsoft does not have personal tech support but contracts external consultants for deployment and support. When a client has an issue, Microsoft sends emails to different MVP architects around the world to provide the best support.

Positive

AWS has many features but presents issues with Microsoft applications integration. Azure is preferred for its flexibility, scalability, and strength as a cloud solution.

The initial setup process is straightforward for me. However, depending on the project requirements, it might be complex for others.

Deployment requires two developers and one architect. Maintenance can be handled by one person.

Depending on the project, the return on investment varies. As an Azure cost management specialist, I can provide detailed cost assessments using the Azure calculator.

Using the Azure calculator, I evaluate projects and create cost prospects. The process is defined by Microsoft's framework and needs specific project assessments.

I have used other ADC or WAF products like AWS. However, Azure is preferred due to its flexibility, scalability, and strength.

I recommend using Azure for its flexibility, scalability, and strong solutions. It is the best cloud solution for various organizational needs.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I've used the solution for a simple at-home application where I just wanted to host something live and have load balancing built into it. I can't remember where the firewall came in. I know there's some sort of blocking for certain attacks through that firewall, but that was about as far as I really used it.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is an easy-to-use solution.

The solution can sometimes feel a little cumbersome unless you're a professional infrastructure person. I think the tool is just inherently complicated. You have to manually decide things that could have been done best by default.

I haven't seen any outages with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway.

The solution should be able to handle any load.

I've used all three cloud providers for side projects, including Microsoft, Google, and Amazon. If you have a docker container or an image and want to deploy it somewhere, they're all fairly similar. I would choose to stay on a cloud platform because of cost and convenience purposes. If I already have a database running in one cloud, I might deploy an application with that same cloud provider.

The solution's initial setup is really easy, but it takes a long time to get that comfort.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup ten out of ten.

The solution is fairly priced.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten.

The solution's documentation was pretty good and useful. The solution is well-integrated, and I don't think any challenges exist. We are hosting an LOM application for internal use only, but I don't know the details. As an internal user of the LOM, I find it nice and fast. I would recommend the solution to other users.

I think some things in the tool are multi-step when they could have been a single step. Obviously, I understand that design decisions go into that. The solution can sometimes feel a little cumbersome unless you're a professional infrastructure person.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We used the solution to build our own applications, publish for clients, and provide software for service.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway gives us a lot of benefits, including domain mapping. We use a lot of Azure web tools, API servers, and API agents to fetch data from different locations.

Some application gateway certificates are mismapped. The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that. We have a lot of limitations while upgrading Microsoft Azure Application Gateway from version one to version two.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Application Gateway for three years.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

There is a limitation on the number of hosts in Microsoft Azure Application Gateway version one, which can be increased. Around 1,000 users use the solution in our organization.

I don't have any issues with the solution's technical support. They give 100% support and respond within four hours.

The initial setup of the solution is very simple and user-friendly.

The solution's deployment time depends on the application. If it is a legacy application, it takes around one hour to one and a half hours. If everything is good from the server side, the deployment will take a maximum of 20 to 30 minutes.

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has less price than other application gateway solutions.

The solution will hide a lot of security benefits in the back end. We have different ports, and the hackers cannot identify which port is used on the back end. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway provides load balancing and high application availability. It is faster than any other gateway service.

Integrating the solution with our infrastructure becomes easy when we receive suggestions from the technical team, which has architecture-level skills. However, if you have less knowledge, the integration becomes very difficult. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Customers use the product for internal and public URLs or websites. They use it with the multi-site feature. The same application gateway is being used for multiple URLs.

The tool is beneficial because we don't have to use another product. We are completely on Azure. Wherever possible, we use all native products or services.

We use all the features. It is very useful. Using WAF, we can control the WAF rules based on our application requirements. We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled. The role of the tool is limited to HTTP traffic. It does exactly what it must do. It's a regional service.

We know how to use it for DR scenarios. WAF has been the most valuable in protecting applications. We use at least three instances in the back end to give the best performance for our applications. The management and configuration of the solution is quite easy. All certificate renewals are automatically taken care of by Key Vault.

The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules. Wherever it works, we use it. Where it doesn’t work, we use other products. We are waiting to get regular expression support on the path-based rules in future releases. Without it, some of the complex routing cannot be done. For example, if we have 50 path-based routing rules, instead of writing 50 rules, I can write the regular expression-based rule and reduce them to one or two. It would minimize the management of rules.

I have been using the solution for five years.

The tool is quite stable. Once we deploy it, we never touch it. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

We are running more than two instances. We have never had any issues with the scalability. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. Three of our customers are using the solution in their organization. They are enterprise-level businesses.

The technical support is good. We can call support anytime we want. We have worked with the support team on implementations.

Positive

It took me some time to learn the tool. Now, I have mastered it. We can quickly provision it using the automation tools. It is completely automated now. I rate the ease of setup a six out of ten. It is not that easy. We must know how load balancers, routing, and application gateways work. The product is deployed on the cloud. Normally, it takes us four weeks to deploy one application gateway and make it work for a particular requirement. The deployment is all done by Terraform. We have a build stage and a deployment stage.

The product is not expensive. The enterprise customer I work with has never complained about the cost of the solution. It is quite cheap. I rate the pricing a five out of ten. We pay egress fees, too.

People who want to use the solution can use it. I think it is a good product. I'm not very sure about the competing products. I will recommend the tool to others. It works well. It is feature and purpose-focused. Wherever we have HTTP traffic, we should use Microsoft Azure Application Gateway along with WAF. It will give us full protection for our web applications. People should compare the product with Front Door and choose what is best for them. Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.