We performed a comparison between Azure Firewall and McAfee StoneGate [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."Security management tool that's easy to integrate and easy to work with. No issues found with its stability and scalability."
"Secure, user-friendly, stable, and scalable network security solution. Installation is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is load balancing. It can provide central management and VPNA. Additionally, it has enhanced our security environment."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use. Anyone can easily maintain it."
"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."
"The web tutor and automatic rules by schedule are good features."
"A strong point of FortiGate is that the graphical interface is complete and easy to use, especially if we think there is a list of operations that we are able to perform inside."
"We have found it to be very reliable and that's why our teams and various users in our company use it as our main firewall every day."
"I think that one of the best features is definitely the premium version, along with the IDPs in terms of the intrusion detection and prevention system."
"The solution should be capable of self-scaling, which is one of the features we like about it."
"The Layer four features are okay and meet my business needs."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is threat intelligence. It is based on filtering and can identify multiple threats."
"Great security and connectivity."
"It is easy for me to protect certain ports or even the IP addresses, as well as do whitelisting, blacklisting, and the FQDN when we want virtual machines connected and to protect certain websites."
"Network filtering is valuable. The scalability capability from the cloud-native service helps us a lot because it simplifies our day-to-day maintenance activity."
"We did not have issues with scalabiliy."
"It works well with a highly-active cluster."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"The initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"If I had any criticism that I would give FortiGate, it would be that they need to stop changing their logging format. Every time we do a firmware upgrade, it is a massive issue on the SIM. Parsers have to be rebuilt. Even the FortiGate guys came in and said that they don't play well in the sandbox."
"Their software support needs improvement. I would prefer to have better support for bug fixes. Sometimes, we open a ticket, and it is very difficult to get a solution. Specifically, we are not at all happy with their support for load balancing."
"The central management for the FortiGate Fortinet Firewall needs improvement. They have the manager to do the essential management for both SD-WAN and for the security policy. They should also improve the SD-WAN function."
"With FortiGate, the main complaint that I have heard is about the technical support."
"An Azure firewall is not a real firewall."
"The interface could be improved, it's not very user friendly."
"There are a number of things that need to be simplified, but it's mostly costs. It needs to be simplified because it's pretty expensive."
"The solution lacks artificial intelligence and machine learning. It might be in the roadmap. However, currently, it's not available."
"They can improve the pricing of Azure Firewall."
"This solution is not mature when it comes to handling perimeter traffic like internet browsing."
"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."
"The reporting, logging, and monitoring features, as well as the flexibility of the policies, need to be improved."
"After some experience with the solution, we had to do some redesign, but generally, we were happy with the product."
Earn 20 points
Azure Firewall is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 33 reviews while McAfee StoneGate [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls. Azure Firewall is rated 7.2, while McAfee StoneGate [EOL] is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall writes "Easy to use and configure but could be more robust". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee StoneGate [EOL] writes "The HA cluster had issues during deployment, but the solution gives us better application control than with our previous solution". Azure Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and Check Point NGFW, whereas McAfee StoneGate [EOL] is most compared with .
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.