We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and StackPath WAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), F5, Microsoft and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."The solution has built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure."
"Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"The production is a valuable feature."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"It does an excellent job of load balancing."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"The product’s most valuable is WAF. The authentication feature helps us protect WordPress sites."
"In the next release, the solution could improve the integration with Service Mesh and other Azure Security Services."
"The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
"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 working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"The product’s performance for caching feature needs improvement."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews while StackPath WAF is ranked 27th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2, while StackPath WAF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of StackPath WAF writes "Stable product with an easy setup process ". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas StackPath WAF is most compared with AWS WAF and Sucuri.
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.
