Azure Bastion Reviews

Neutral

Positive

Azure Bastion is a service that allows you to create an infrastructure on Azure. My organization helps companies implement and optimize the Azure infrastructure.

The solution's most valuable feature is that it is easy to use and fast. It is a good tool for creating infrastructure as code. It is modernized, so I can create complex infrastructures.

I think the tool is pretty good. It is like having a tool that just works. If there are better tools that Azure comes up with, then that is a separate thing. In the current scenario, Azure Bastion is not a bad product. In my company, we are not facing any challenges or limitations with the tool.

Speaking of AI, having Microsoft Copilot in Azure Bastion would be good. As of now, Microsoft Copilot is not something that has been considered for Azure Bastion. It would be a good addition if it is done in the future.

I have been using Azure Bastion for a year. My company operates as Microsoft's SI and ISV partner.

It is a stable solution. Considering the way my company uses the tool, I don't find any challenges with the product, so it is a stable solution.

Scalability does not apply because creating the infrastructure with Azure Bastion is like having small code, but it is scalable in that you can create complex infrastructure. The tool is scalable only in a certain manner.

The solution's technical support is satisfactory. Everything depends on the support plan that you have. If you have the right support plan, the support plan is actually really good. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with Azure Resource Manager. Azure Resource Manager and Azure Bastion have the same use cases in my company. Azure Bastion is better than Azure Resource Manager.

As you are able to automate the infrastructure and create infrastructure on the fly, I would say that the return on investment is high.

The tool is cheaply priced. I would say that the product is free to use.

Whether Azure Bastion handles network latency and large-scale connections is irrelevant as it is not something that is valid because it is just used as a code for configurations. It would not be right to frame a question where one asks how HTML CSS handles the network connections because network connection, bandwidth, connectivity, and concurrent connections are areas that depend heavily on the infrastructure as opposed to the code. The area revolves around code matters, but infrastructure is the key component. As Azure Bastion is there to create the infrastructure, it is not valid to discuss whether it can handle network latency and large-scale connections.

Azure Bastion is a secure tool.

I have not seen any AI capabilities in the tool.

People can create complex infrastructure and a hierarchy, but it all depends on how they organize their code and files. If they organize it the right way, the entire solution and the entire infrastructure would be smooth enough to be deployed with Azure Bastion.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Our customers use the product to connect to Azure virtual machines. It is a perfect solution that they can easily connect to the browser and experience the VM services.

Azure Bastion makes it easy to provide quick virtual machine access to our customers. We don’t have to build complex SSL VPN tunnels and connect to the infrastructure. It is time-saving. It helps us save around four work hours per month for us.

It is great that we don’t have to connect any ports to the internet using the product. We can just connect over to SSL tunneling into the browser. It is really helpful.

We are not able to copy and paste files directly into the server over the patch host. We have to transfer files over to Azure Storage.

We have been using Azure Bastion for two years.

The product is scalable.

We have never contacted the product’s technical support team as it is very easy to implement.

We have used SSL VPN. We switched to Azure Bastion as it is more secure and easy to access.

The initial setup is simple. We have to start a wizard and deploy the patching host. It follows by giving access to all the accounts. It is a straightforward process.

The product costs around $150 per month. It does not save money for us.

We did not evaluate other products as we already had a native solution on Azure. Thus, there was no possibility of implementing a similar product.

The product improved the security posture of our organization. We don’t have open ports and connect them to servers using it. We can carry out two-factor authentication to protect the devices with conditional access features.

It would be nice to have a feature to copy and paste the files into servers. I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use it to access the 144 virtual machines hosted in Azure. This service provides a secure entry point, allowing us to connect to our VMs without public IP addresses. Our setup benefits from the streamlined and secure remote access Azure Bastion provides for our Azure-based infrastructure.

One significant benefit is the ability to have direct control over our infrastructure. Unlike before, where we relied on Rackspace for tasks like resizing VMs and managing databases, having hands-on access to our own products within Azure has proven to be a highly favorable aspect. Our organization's overall security posture has significantly improved. While we encountered various challenges with Rackspace, the transition to Azure, particularly with Azure Bastion, has provided us with a more secure means of accessing our VMs. This has been a substantial improvement, not only in terms of security but also in cost management. The move to Azure has saved us money compared to the nickel-and-dime expenses associated with Rackspace support. Troubleshooting and issue resolution have become more efficient. Previously, a task that might have taken an hour over the phone with Rackspace can now be accomplished in just five to ten minutes. The streamlined process has notably improved our workload and task completion times.

The most significant advantage lies in its runbook features, particularly beneficial for our infrastructure team. These features enable us to expedite the VM provisioning process significantly. As part of the infrastructure team, this capability allows us to swiftly spin up VMs, reducing the time required to onboard new clients to approximately 15 to 30 minutes.

While the support has generally been responsive, there were instances where we faced challenges due to miscommunication regarding our specific needs in Azure. To enhance the support experience, it would be beneficial to have a more specific and itemized list when submitting requests. While general support is valuable, having a detailed breakdown of the specific issues would contribute to a more streamlined and efficient resolution process.

I have been using it for a year now.

We haven't experienced any issues with stability.

I don't have the specific metrics for scalability yet.

The support is consistently prompt and efficient. They are proactive and well-resourced, demonstrating a strong grasp of technology and extensive knowledge. I'm highly satisfied with the responsiveness, particularly in critical situations. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

We were previously hosted with Rackspace but migrated to Azure last year. Since then, we've experienced notable improvements, especially faster processing times. Direct control and hands-on access to our products has significantly accelerated our processes. We can now swiftly deploy new sites, spin up VMs, and set up databases for those VMs at a much faster pace. The overall infrastructure has notably improved since we gained this level of control. Moreover, both cost management and time efficiency have seen considerable enhancements.

The initial deployment and setup were not straightforward; it took several months to complete.

The process involved scripting and overseeing the entire migration process to ensure the proper transfer of all our data. Initially, we conducted sandbox and testing phases to ensure the functionality of our existing setup. Following this, we proceeded with weekly production deployments for various states. However, once the initial hurdles were overcome, we established a rhythm, and the subsequent operations went exceptionally smoothly. I believe a consultant was involved, as well as my supervisor.

Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.

The solution breaks down sometimes. 

I have been working with the product for four years. 

The tool is scalable. My company has more than 100 users for the product. 

The product's setup is easy.

I would rate the tool an eight out of ten. 

We have various uses for the solution, but primarily to address security concerns. We used the Azure CLI to connect to the Azure VMs we created for our customers. It was essential for us to be able to connect to the VMs in a simple, secure, and smooth way.

We conducted a migration process to move our customer's on-prem environment onto Azure, using Azure Bastion for login and remote login sessions. The transition took two to three months, and getting used to the product was an experience, though we didn't encounter any problems. Bastion works as advertised; there's a vacuum, and we script using an Azure-based CLI.

The ability to operate the product with scripting is excellent. 

The solution's ease of use is also favorable; we could send the login script to the customer, and they could use it with their ID in the connection box without any other impact. This was of great benefit.

The Microsoft documentation is handy; it's straightforward and easy to follow.

The protocol speed could be faster. 

We've been using the solution for over a year. 

The stability is satisfactory; we never had any availability or connection problems.

The product is scalable.

We never had to contact technical support. 

The deployment was relatively straightforward; I used the Microsoft-provided documentation and wrote the script myself. The solution doesn't require any maintenance. 

We were previously unable to use RDP sessions, so I consulted with our security team and they recommended Bastion to help resolve this issue. We ran some tests and found the solution was straightforward and worked well; that's why we started using it. 

The pricing is a lower decision point than high-quality security for our organization. Better security comes at a cost, but it's worth it, and that's what we tell our customers.

I rate the solution ten out of ten. 

We're delighted with the product; it does everything we need it to do, and it does it well.

My advice to those considering the solution is to have a clear picture of your environment and use cases. Important questions include how many hours will the connection be working? Extra features depend on your specific requirements, and consulting with an architect over the implementation is a must, as it could become challenging otherwise.

Every organization has public and private IP addresses, and you can't log into every machine over the internet. That's where Azure Bastion comes into the picture. You can configure Bastion on one machine, and from that machine, you can RDP or PuTTY to all the machines. RDP is for Windows, and PuTTY is for Linux.

In our team, there are several people. Usually, for RDP, they would require a license, whereas, with Bastion, there is no RDP license. You just go ahead and log in with your domain credential, and you can start working on it. It saves license costs. 

It provides all the security to us. Without getting on the internet, we can access our servers. We can access our desktop through our web browser. We don't need to run the mstsc command and login to the VM. All those things are not required.

Without logging into the Jump server, you can configure Bastion in Azure in the same virtual network, and you can access your VMs.

The security that it maintains is also valuable. We can't copy and paste data from our local machine to the Jump server. Azure Bastion maintains that level of security.

Implementation-wise, a little bit of improvement is required because the tips they have provided are a little bit tricky.

There are some challenges because Bastion is more compatible with Edge but not with the other browsers. As an organization, it doesn't make sense that we have to use only Edge. We should be able to access Bastion over Chrome, Mozilla, or Opera. It should be our choice.

A little bit of improvement is required for Linux because we can add Bastion on the Windows machine, but PuTTY is implemented for Linux. We have to log in to Bastion, and through that, we have to go to the PuTTY service.

I've been using Azure Bastion for the past five years.

Its stability is good. It isn't going away from the market any time soon. It was introduced only five or six years ago.

Scalability is not applicable for Bastion.

I didn't have any need to contact them.

We had Citrix virtualization. The Jump box was installed or configured on top of VMware. We had to virtualize through Citrix. We had to log in and access the machine through Citrix. Previously, our setup was on-premises, whereas now, it's migrated to the cloud. For the cloud, Bastion was introduced. It requires some improvements, but it provides more security. Previously, we had to deploy our VM in VMware, and we had to add that VM into Citrix virtualization. We had to go to the web browser, put in our credentials, and log in to access the remote desktop, but it was not safe because the URL is hosted on top of the internet. We had a firewall, but it wasn't as safe as Bastion. So, Bastion is good from the security and licensing perspective.

It's straightforward. The only complexity that you should be aware of is the IP address. 

We have a separate team that takes care of its implementation, and after that, it comes to the operations team. It can be implemented in half an hour by one person.

In terms of maintenance, no maintenance is required from our side. If any maintenance is happening through Microsoft, then the site would be down, and you won't be able to access it. From our side, it doesn't require anything. We don't have to pay for that.

I'd recommend it if you want to maintain security. You should not go over the internet for RDP and all similar things because that's not safe. There should also be data protection. If you are doing RDP from your system to any virtual machines, you can do x y z. If you type the mstsc command on your machine, there is an option to attach your local machine disk to the remote desktop. Data privacy should be there. Bastion should not allow you to copy any data from your local machine. You have to play around only within the network.

Overall, I'd rate Bastion an eight out of ten. A little bit of modification is required, but the service is very good.

I'm using it for management. It's a management tool. It's like an RDP on HTML. I'm using it to manage virtual machines on Azure.

If you want to manage a server or a virtual machine, you use the remote desktop service to access it. It is on the browser itself. As we are managing Azure Bastion, we have virtual machines, so to access the virtual machines, to avoid having or publishing the RDP port, and to avoid the security breaches on the RDP port, we use the Azure Bastion, which is a managing service on Microsoft. 

As an Azure consultant, for me, it is the best way to give the administrator access as you can manage the permission - including who can access Bastion. 

It is using something called role-based access control, so you can control permission. The good thing with Bastion is its ability to avoid publishing the virtual machines on Azure using public IPs. You will also avoid attacks as most of the attacks on Azure virtual machines come from the remote desktop port. Therefore, with Azure Bastion you will have a Bastion host that will be secure, of course, as it's a gateway secured on HTTPS traffic. 

It's very easy to use as it's in the browser; it is on the menu of the virtual machine, so you just need to type your username and password and you will have a full RDP experience. 

It solves many, many, many, many issues for us.

It's like an RDP gateway. It will let you access the virtual machines and have a full RDP experience. It's not full, however, for example, you cannot copy content inside, due to the RDP not being on the browser. It's HTML-based, where you cannot copy, for example, the full RDP experience to copy data from your computer to the server. That is the only limitation on the Azure Bastion.

If we can copy content and drag and drop it on the HTML, this would be helpful.

There's something called UDR on Azure. We cannot apply, as, when you deploy Azure Bastion, the networking part of the Azure Bastion, it needs a separate subnet for it. When you create the Azure Bastion, you need the subnet, like a network range for this subnet. The issue with that is you cannot manage this subnet on a way to control the traffic and to route the traffic from Azure Bastion, for example, to your firewall. Each virtual network should have its own subnet. This is maybe the problem. It's the networking part and applying the routing table on it that is where the issue lies.

If they can make the Azure console, or the VM console, available on the Azure Bastion, so when you reboot the VM, you can still see what's happening during the reboot, maybe it will be better. You could even troubleshoot issues if you have boot issues on the virtual machine, which is not available in Azure Bastion, as Azure Bastion will just give you access when the VM restarts and when you have the login page of Windows. However, when the VM restarts, you will not have this visibility on what's happening on the reboot, and we face many issues in the boot.

When you have a boot issue on Windows, you cannot use Azure Bastion to fix it. You have to use the Azure console or the VM console, and it is very limited. To make Bastion the best product as a management tool or an RDP tool, it will be better to bring the features of the hypervisor, local hypervisor, Hyper-V console, to Azure Bastion. 

The solution is stable. There aren't issues with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's not a scalable product. It's a managed service, so you cannot do anything with this service, as this product is managed by Microsoft Azure. You cannot do anything, you just need to deploy it. Therefore, there is no way to make it scalable.

We have many customers using the product. the whole government uses it. 

I've never used technical support for this product. At one point I might have contacted them as a service request to ask about something on the networking of Azure Bastion, however, that's about it.

We did not previously use a different product.

The solution is easy to set up. You need to create a subnet for it and then you just create the Azure host and then you can manage the permission. It's easy. It's very easy to use, to deploy it, and to use it.

Deployment takes maybe around one minute to maybe five minutes. It just takes one person to deploy.

We don't need to worry about maintenance as Microsoft handles it. It's a cloud product.

The solution is a platform as a service.

I don't have any visibility on the pricing. It's not an aspect I handle. 

We're Microsoft partners.

I'm not working as an administrator. I'm a consultant working with the IT company that is delivering Azure to our customers. I'm deploying Azure Bastion for the customers. I even give some knowledge transfer to the customer, the Azure administrator, to manage their virtual machine using Azure Bastion.

If you have an Azure virtual machine, you have to use the Azure Bastion. We force the customers to use it and avoid mapping public IPs on the VMs.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.