Airlock vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway comparison

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

We performed a comparison between Airlock and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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).
765,386 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
"Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product."

More Airlock Pros →

"The solution is easy to set up.""WAF feature replicates the firewall.""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 most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use.""The pricing is quite good.""The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable.""The solution has built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure.""We find it valuable because it is compatible with our existing Azure solution."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pros →

Cons
"The tool must be simplified."

More Airlock Cons →

"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful.""The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that.""The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team.""The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible.""One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS.""The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly.""The monitoring on the solution could be better.""Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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 →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product.
    Top Answer:The tool is cheap. We are protecting very sensitive portals. We didn't have a single incident for the last 15 years.
    Top Answer:The tool must be simplified. However, if it is simplified, it will lose its competitive edge. The solution requires advanced administrators. However, it has endless features. It would be good if it… more »
    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.
    Ranking
    Views
    423
    Comparisons
    343
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Views
    15,386
    Comparisons
    13,331
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    366
    Rating
    7.5
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Airlock Suite
    Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
    Learn More
    Overview

    The problem of internet security is almost as old as the internet itself. But there is a reliable solution: Airlock Suite from Ergon. Airlock Suite is underpinned by superb Swiss engineering expertise, many years of experience and well thought-out concepts that master the most complex challenges. Airlock Suite deals with the issues of filtering and authentication in one complete and coordinated solution - setting new standards for usability and services.

    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.

    Sample Customers
    Raiffeisen, SGKB, Generali, Visana
    Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Construction Company10%
    Government10%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company28%
    Comms Service Provider20%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Government7%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise68%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business40%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise64%
    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.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Airlock is ranked 28th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Airlock is rated 10.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Airlock writes "Provides endless features and can be adapted to every single application that exists in the world". 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". Airlock is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix Web App and API Protection, HUMAN BotGuard for Applications and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and AWS WAF.

    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.