We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I have contacted the support team of Akamai... I am happy with their responses and answers to my problems."
"It is scalable for DDoS."
"Everything will be handled by Akamai's system before it reaches our infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."
"Adaptive stream delivery and WAF protection are valuable."
"The features are powerful and better than F5."
"Traffic filtering and WAF are valuable."
"The solution easily identifies, delays, or allows business traffic."
"I like the tool's stability and performance."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"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 security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"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."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."
"In terms of precedence of Akamai rules, the last one is implemented. That is the one that is operational. If two rules contradict, the last one is implemented. We had a clash, but it was really tough to find that out. I would like to have a rulebook because, in their architecture documentation, it is not mentioned anywhere that if two rules clash, the last one works, and if it does not work, then what to do. This is something we were debating today with their tech support. With AWS, we get documents for the issues so that they do not occur in the future. Akamai's support and knowledge base needs to be improved."
"The WAF features definitely have a lot of room for improvement. A lot of the WAF is really basic. For some products or some of our solutions, we need to run a second layer of more advanced WAF. If it had better layer seven protection then we would not need a second WAF."
"One area where Akamai can improve is the captcha part. Cloudflare provides a captcha if there are a certain number of threats. For example, I can assign that if there are 10 requests within a second from a single IP, it should send a captcha to the user. The user should fill in the captcha, and only after that, the user should be able to access our website. This captcha feature should be built into Bot Manager. I love this captcha feature of Cloudflare."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"One thing I asked them is to integrate the API discovery product that they have and push that data into Akamai App and API Protector so that we do not have two types of reviews to identify the type of traffic. We already know the APIs that are frequently getting used, so analysis becomes easier. We can integrate both products and use them."
"The product should provide a secure NTP."
"There are some issues with pushing configurations across a network. It still takes about 20 minutes and that means to retract it's another 20 minutes."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
"The product could be easier to use and implement."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
"The working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"The increased security that we are considering is because of some of the things that the security team has brought to our attention. They have pointed out that we would most likely require a better web application firewall than Azure Application Gateway."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Akamai App and API Protector writes "Easy to learn and gives us a report of traffic". 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". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, AWS WAF, Prolexic, AWS Shield and Arbor DDoS, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF and Fortinet FortiWeb. See our Akamai App and API Protector vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
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.
