Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"I like its ability to identify known attacks, including DDOS attacks. It's valuable because software must be able to stop known attacks. Application attacks are evolving all the time. When it comes to software-as-a-service, we need to have software that knows about all the latest attacks. It should also protect against major unknown attacks.""The most valuable features of the solution are it is plug and play, has automated policies, a simple configuration, and is easy to create rules.""It provides an ease of policy management.""The product's bot protection feature is valuable for our company.""The solution can be used for threat prevention or as a cloud-to-cloud backup system"

More Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service Pros →

"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly.""The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use.""We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities.""The solution is easy to set up.""I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks.""The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF).""It has a filter available, although we are not currently using it because it is not part of our requirements. But it is a good option and when it becomes part of our requirements we will definitely use it.""We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pros →

Cons
"It's a very specific solution that is only requested for a customer's web code or their global IT policy.""The solution can improve by bundling Security Operation Center (SOC) with the WAF-as-a-Service, it would provide a lot more value to customers.""We found it a bit slow when accessing it through the web browser. The URL also exposed the user name and the hashed password. When I log into my Barracuda WAF user portal, I could see the username and the hashed password on the URL itself. So, it is not very secure, and it is important to take that off.""The stability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.""One significant area for improvement in Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service lies in its market positioning and pricing strategy."

More Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service Cons →

"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM.""The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team.""Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products.""The security of the product could be adjusted.""The monitoring on the solution could be better.""The product's performance should be better.""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.""Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It's very difficult for me to give an estimate of the cost. All I know is that we sell the box itself as a service."
  • "I rate the product's price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. There are no additional costs to be paid apart from the standard licensing fees attached to the solution."
  • "The product is expensive but it offers flexible pricing. It could be affordable."
  • More Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It is not expensive."
  • "Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."
  • "Between v1 and v2, there is a lot of change in the pricing. It is very costly compared to AWS."
  • "There is some additional cost, such as extended support."
  • "The cost is not an issue."
  • "The solution is reasonably priced compared to other solutions."
  • "The pricing is based on how much you use the solution."
  • "The solution is paid monthly. The solution is highly expensive."
  • More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:One significant area for improvement in Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service lies in its market positioning and pricing strategy. Additionally, it could operate in a local data center. This limitation hinders… more »
    Top Answer:We use the product for securing email systems, protecting websites, and safeguarding web-based applications and portals.
    Top Answer:We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the… more »
    Top Answer:Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit for… more »
    Top Answer:We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled.
    Ranking
    Views
    687
    Comparisons
    479
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    837
    Rating
    6.0
    Views
    15,386
    Comparisons
    13,331
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    366
    Rating
    7.5
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Barracuda WAF as a Service
    Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
    Learn More
    Overview

    Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is a comprehensive solution designed to provide application security, DDoS protection, SSL authentication, protocol support, and application delivery. It is a plug-and-play solution with automated policies, simple configuration, and easy rule creation. 

    The solution can be used for threat prevention or as a cloud-to-cloud backup system based on email protection with cloud security. It is also a web application firewall and covers major protection and threat management functions. With Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service, customers can ensure the security of their web code and comply with global IT policies.

    Azure Application Gateway is a web traffic load balancer that enables you to manage traffic to your web applications. Traditional load balancers operate at the transport layer (OSI layer 4 - TCP and UDP) and route traffic based on source IP address and port, to a destination IP address and port.

    To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.

    Sample Customers
    Salvation Army
    Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Government12%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company28%
    Comms Service Provider20%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Government7%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise55%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business40%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise64%
    Buyer's Guide
    Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is ranked 25th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 5 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is rated 7.2, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service writes "Easy to install platform with valuable policy management features ". 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". Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and AWS WAF. See our Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service 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.