"It is configurable via API."
"It is a SaaS solution unlike much of the competition."
"Technical support has a very fast response time and they are helpful."
"The security features are valuable. The particular feature we use is called OWASP."
"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."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"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."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"It would be ideal if the solution offered better log integration and more integration with different platforms."
"Their documentation could be better. They don't have documentation that explains everything well. They have documentation for everything you're looking for, but they lack a single piece of documentation to tie everything together. As a new user or beginner, it took us a little bit of time to figure out how to put all these things in place."
"The ModSecurity core rules need to be updated."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"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."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 3 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 12 reviews. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall writes "A SaaS solution that is API configurable and a convenient part of a suite but needs updating of core rules". 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". Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is most compared with Azure Front Door, AWS WAF, Fastly, Signal Sciences and Indusface AppTrana, 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 Cloudflare. See our Cloudflare 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.
