We performed a comparison between Azure Firewall and Sangfor NGAF 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."The initial installation is very straightforward."
"We use the filtering feature the most. It has filtering and inbuilt securities. We can create customized rules to define which users can access a particular type of site. We can create policies inside the firewall."
"Using this product makes the VPN seamless and almost invisible to me in the sense that I don't have to think about it."
"Fortinet FortiGate has many valuable features, such as IDS, and intrusion detection. It has security features that are in part with the technologies that are available in the market."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It's very fast and easy to configure."
"Our security improved from being able to put in rules and close off unwanted traffic."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"Among the most valuable features are the DDoS protection that protects your virtual machines, the threat intelligence, and traffic filtering."
"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."
"Azure Firewall's feature that I have found most valuable is its scalability."
"The firewall policy control, URL content control, and antivirus are all the most valuable aspects. Threat prevention is as well quite good."
"One of the best features is that it natively integrates with Azure Services and tools. When you have a third-party offering, that is not the case. But Azure Firewall provides a comprehensive and seamless security solution for your Azure resources."
"The solution is very stable. When comparing it to other environments, it's actually quite impressive."
"I can easily configure it."
"It's auto-scalable, which is a great feature."
"The stability of Sangfor NGAF is good."
"I think Sangfor NGAF is more valuable than Cisco products because of its simplicity and ease of management. If I compare it with Palo Alto and Cisco, both are quite complex products. And if I compare it with FortiGate firewalls from Fortinet, I have also used all these products. Fortinet and Sangfor NGAF are similar products because the applications behind the application and policy layers are almost identical."
"In four steps one can configure the entire firewall."
"It seems to be a durable, stable product."
"We've found the technical support to be helpful."
"So far, the performance and reliability of the product have supported our company's critical network traffic."
"Sangfor has the best capabilities for securing connections, securing web browsers, securing servers, and general threat protection."
"It's a very simple to use product."
"Pricing for it is a bit high. It could be cheaper."
"The pricing could be a bit better, especially when you consider how they have the most basic offering priced."
"It should come integrated or have its own type of network monitor tool in a module. There should just be one package, and you are good to go."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"The initial setup is complex."
"I think that the infrastructure for the VPN could be improved. The way that it is bundled also made it difficult to use and sell as it is too expensive."
"Fortinet needs to overhaul its documentation."
"The reports are very basic."
"An Azure firewall is not a real firewall."
"The reporting, logging, and monitoring features, as well as the flexibility of the policies, need to be improved."
"We find it's different implementing it region-to-region. It might help if it was universal across all regions."
"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."
"Currently, it only supports IP addresses, so you have to be specific about the IPs that are in your environment."
"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."
"This solution is not mature when it comes to handling perimeter traffic like internet browsing."
"The threat intelligence part could be better. I don't see why our customers have to get an additional solution with Azure Firewall. It would be great if they made it on par with Palo Alto."
"Sangfor need greater exposer in the market because the market is mainly saturated by Fortinet. The user experience of Fortinet is quite different compared to NGAF. If we want to switch our users from Fortinet to NGAF, we have to convince them that the user experience will be much easier once once they start to use it."
"The setup phase is quite complex."
"The reporting and log management could be improved."
"The tool is expensive."
"The web interface needs to be improved, making it more user-friendly."
"The support offered by the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required. The knowledge levels and response time of the support team need improvement."
"Occasional issues with breaches which are dealt with expediently."
"The support for YouTube or the Internet is not enough."
Azure Firewall is ranked 16th in Firewalls with 33 reviews while Sangfor NGAF is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 31 reviews. Azure Firewall is rated 7.2, while Sangfor NGAF is rated 8.0. 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 Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". Azure Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Netgate pfSense, whereas Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and Fortinet FortiOS. See our Azure Firewall vs. Sangfor NGAF 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.