"The installation is straightforward."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, especially if you enlist assistance."
"You don't need help from Barracuda to help with the deployment. The deployment is easy."
"Setup of this solution is straightforward. It's a stable and scalable solution, with good performance and fast technical support."
"Even when we were upgrading to a new OS, we didn't have any difficulties with the product. The stability is good."
"The solution has been quite stable. It's reliable."
"We use Barracuda to protect the application. That's the main feature we use it for."
"The solution offers multiple security features. There are machine learning features and great URL encryption. It also offers multi-protocol support against DDoS attacks."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"The most valuable feature is WAF."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway are the policies, the data store they are using, and the cloud platform it operates on."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"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."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The pricing is quite good."
"They could improve their performance, support, and their upgrades. Their updates used to be good. Their improvements were right on the money but nowadays, the updates are minor."
"The GUI needs to be improved because it sometimes hangs and needs to be restarted."
"It would be better if their updates would be released annually."
"The reporting aspect of the solution needs improvement. I don't find that it's very good. They could do some work on it to make it much better. It's not that the reporting isn't secure. It's just that I would prefer to store my reports for an extended period of time. Right now, that's not possible and I'd prefer it if that could change. I also would say that the reports themselves are expensive."
"While the UI is good, it can get a little bit complicated."
"As most people are aware, the implementation is not easy."
"Its interface can be better. It is not very friendly."
"We've had some blocks of the application and some false positives."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"In the next release, the solution could improve the integration with Service Mesh and other Azure Security Services."
"It takes a lot of time for a certificate to update in the system. That is a huge drawback, affecting the load-balancing side. And when there are changes to the load balancing, it affects the end-user."
"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."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
More Barracuda Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Barracuda Web Application Firewall is ranked 7th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 14 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 12 reviews. Barracuda Web Application Firewall is rated 7.8, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Barracuda Web Application Firewall writes "Reliable and stable with a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "Needs better security and functionality, and requires more intelligence to make it competitive". Barracuda Web Application Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), HAProxy, AWS WAF and F5 Advanced WAF, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF and NGINX App Protect. See our Barracuda Web Application Firewall 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.
