Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Azure Web Application Firewall vs Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Web Application Firewall
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
22nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (12th)
Microsoft Purview Communica...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
30th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
GRC (8th), Digital Risk Protection (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Web Application Firewall is 1.9%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Mano Senaratne - PeerSpot reviewer
Comprehensive suite simplifies configuration while frequent updates require management
Mainly, it comes with the complete suite of Microsoft services. I can use it in conjunction with the best options and other features that come with it. Configuration is much easier than using different platforms. For example, if I have hosted the application in AWS and am using the Application Firewall from Azure, there are certain additional steps to follow when configuring them. With Microsoft, everything is within a single suite, making it easier to configure and plan. Azure continually upgrades platforms and sends us messages to upgrade to the next version, simplifying the process. Later, it's much easier if I want to upgrade the software platform, scale it, or move it to a different application host as the whole suite comes together. The return on investment is good. If I am doing applications for clients, I can invoice them for better costs. Most applications that I run and use have a better return on investment.
Rey Vazquez - PeerSpot reviewer
Creates robust rules for communication and data security, boosting compliance measures
I was talking with some engineer from Microsoft about how we can audit our web page. They create or add to Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance that part, the Layer seven of the OSI model, to check the application and maintain a good practice of coding. I've tried the web page part, and it works great. However, monitoring and compliance for web applications could be improved.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is almost impossible to access these assets from outside, requiring a very skilled attacker to obtain asset tokens of a customer using Azure."
"The Microsoft support and the analytics are what I appreciate about Azure Web Application Firewall; it integrates effectively with things such as Sentinel and Defender for Cloud, so mostly it's the analytics and now the AI capabilities that have been introduced with Co-pilot."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."
"The best features of Azure Web Application Firewall are that it provides security and protection from poorly designed web applications."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"Customer support is excellent."
"Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance helps with extra collaboration and ensures communication is within the framework."
"The features I appreciate the most in Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance include the ability to build cases, give them dates, and find them based on the notes that I left behind."
"The time it saves is very useful."
 

Cons

"The management can be improved."
"From my point of view, there is no need for improvement."
"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"Upgrading the platform regularly is necessary for security, however, frequent updates every six months or year from Azure can be a maintenance overhead."
"Some Azure applications, like the web application firewall, require a certain level of SKU for hosting setup. The basic setup does not allow me to use the web application firewall and other additional services."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"The pricing needs improvement, and I think for beginners it will be a little bit complicated, so the ease of use could be enhanced."
"Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic."
"The product should incorporate more automation with the help of AI."
"Monitoring and compliance for web applications could be improved."
"Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance can be improved by having more tutorials available for those who aren't used to using this platform."
"Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance can be improved by having more tutorials available for those who aren't used to using this platform."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I give the pricing a nine out of ten."
"The price of the solution depends on your architecture and how you manage it. You can control the cost in Azure quite well. The costs do not directly correlate to expenses in the features we are using."
"We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft and the pricing is good."
"The price is for this solution is fair and there is a license needed."
"Azure WAF has price advantages over other WAF solutions. The pricing model is flexible because you pay on a scale based on the level of protection you need."
"The price is reasonable. It is approximately $2,000 US per month."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Web Application Firewall?
As a technical professional, I am not aware of the exact price details, but I know that specific products are more costly than Azure or AWS WAF ( /products/aws-waf-reviews ).
What needs improvement with Azure Web Application Firewall?
Azure Web Application Firewall could improve in logging and troubleshooting processes by making them more streamlined and easier to manage.
What do you like most about Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance?
Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance helps with extra collaboration and ensures communication is within the framework.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance?
I was talking with some engineer from Microsoft about how we can audit our web page. They create or add to Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance that part, the Layer seven of the OSI model, to...
What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance?
Overall, I rate Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance at a nine. I highly recommend it to anyone due to its robust system and valuable resources for IT security, risk assessment, and data mana...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.