We performed a comparison between Azure Firewall and Juniper vSRX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."A good intrusion prevention system and filtering."
"It's very scalable. You can go to different models of the ASAs and they scale up to as big as you want to go."
"The management aspect of the product is very straightforward."
"The VPN feature is the most valuable to us because it accomplishes the task well. We're able to do everything we need to do."
"It just works for us."
"The technical support is excellent. I would rate it as 10 out of 10. When there has been an issue, we have had a good response from them."
"We definitely feel more secure. We have more control over things going in and out of our network."
"I like all of the features."
"The solution should be capable of self-scaling, which is one of the features we like about it."
"In terms of the reporting, it's beautiful. It integrates with Azure monitoring and with Azure policies. That piece is a big help. You can set governing policies and you can use the application firewall, as well as the Azure Firewall, to enforce those policies."
"Among the most valuable features are the DDoS protection that protects your virtual machines, the threat intelligence, and traffic filtering."
"Azure Firewall's feature that I have found most valuable is its scalability."
"I like its order management feature. It doesn't have the kind of threat intelligence that Palo Alto has, but the order management makes it much simpler to know the difference."
"It's auto-scalable, which is a great feature."
"The firewall policy control, URL content control, and antivirus are all the most valuable aspects. Threat prevention is as well quite good."
"The initial setup is straightforward; Azure Firewall does not have a complex implementation process. It is very simple; you just need to enable the service within Azure. It does not require any maintenance because it is managed by Microsoft, that is, it is a fully managed service."
"The most valuable features are application filtering, content filtering, the intrusion prevention system (IPS), and definitely the application firewall."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The hardware is stable."
"This solution works well. Their switches and firewall are good."
"It is deployed on the customer site, and we manage the firewalls on this side."
"It's basic functionality is probably the most valuable feature."
"The stability is not the best."
"There are some limitations with SSL. Regarding the security assessment for the ISO 27000 standard, there are certain features that Cisco needs to scale up. Not all products support it, so you need to be slightly careful, especially on the site track."
"The ASAs are being replaced with the new Firepowers and they have a different type of structure in the configuration to be able to migrate from one to the other."
"An area of improvement for this solution is the console visualization."
"The solution needs to have better logging features."
"The graphical interface could be improved. From what I have seen, Fortinet, for example, has a nicer GUI."
"We only have an issue with time sync with Cisco ASA and NTP. If the time is out of sync, it will be a disaster for the failover."
"Recently, we have been having an issue with the ASA firewall. We haven't found the root cause yet and are still working on it. We failed over the firewall from active to passive and suddenly that resolved the issue. We are now working to find the root cause."
"It is a cloud service, but the lending speed for each region is not always the same. For example, in China, the speed is slow. They need to think about how to make sure that the service pace or speed is always the same in all regions. It would be a great improvement if they can provide the same pace worldwide."
"For larger enterprises, they need to adjust the scalability."
"Right now, with Azure Firewall, we cannot have a normal inbound traffic flow. For inbound, Microsoft suggests using application gateways, so the options are very limited. I cannot use this firewall as an intermediate firewall because of the limitations, and I cannot point routing to another firewall. So if I want to use back-to-back firewall architecture in my environment, I cannot use Azure Firewall for that type of configuration either."
"Azure Firewall definitely needs a broader feature base. It should be able to go all the way up to layer 7 when looking at applications and things like that."
"For large organizations, a third-party firewall would be an added advantage, because it would have more advanced features, things that are not in Azure Firewall."
"The development area and QA area could be improved. With those improvements, we can improve projects and take even less time to implement them."
"It would be nice to be able to create groupings for servers and offer groups of IP addresses."
"Azure Firewall has limited visibility for IDPS, no TLS inspection, no app ID, no user ID, no content ID, no device ID. There is no antivirus or anti-spyware. Azure Firewall doesn't scan traffic for malware unless it triggers an IDPS signature. There is no sandbox or machine learning functionality, meaning we are not protected from Zero-day threats. There is no DNS security and limited web categories."
"I would like to see an activity sensor for malicious content or sensor for viruses and malware."
"It is pretty complex to manage and could be easier."
"Fortinet is more user friendly than Juniper. In terms of remote access, I actually prefer using Fortinet. It's much easier to configure."
"The solution can be improved by allowing automatic updates for the OS devices."
"The GUI really needs a lot of work, and it has got worse with successive version updates."
"The reporting can be improved."
"There are too many types of licenses, which can be confusing."
Azure Firewall is ranked 14th in Firewalls with 17 reviews while Juniper vSRX is ranked 29th in Firewalls with 7 reviews. Azure Firewall is rated 7.0, while Juniper vSRX is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall writes "Good value for your money, good URL filtering, supports intrusion prevention, and is stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper vSRX writes "Good filtering capabilities, supports SSL inspection, helpful technical support". Azure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, Check Point NGFW and pfSense, whereas Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, pfSense, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and Zscaler Cloud Firewall. See our Azure Firewall vs. Juniper vSRX report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.
