Azure Web Application Firewall vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Web Application Firewall
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
18th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (14th)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (10th), Container Security (3rd), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (3rd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (3rd), Compliance Management (2nd)
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the market share of Azure Web Application Firewall is 1.3% and it decreased by 49.4% compared to the previous year. The market share of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 8.0% and it decreased by 45.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite
Unique Categories:
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
6.8%
Vulnerability Management
5.8%
Container Management
0.9%
 

Featured Reviews

SP
Nov 27, 2023
Fast time to deploy and integrates well into the Azure ecosystem, but is expensive
I use the solution as an internal dashboard app for internal customers. We use its different automation features.  We mainly implemented it since it was easy to use and deploy. I was new to Azure and we had to deploy something quickly. The automation gives us a quick turnaround.  The time to…
ES
Aug 28, 2023
Gives insight into potential avenues for attack paths, but it is expensive, and the user interface must be improved
The solution is deployed on-premise as well as on the public cloud. Our cloud providers are Azure and AWS. We also have some GCP assets. We have around 20,000 total devices. They don’t always correspond to an end user. Of those, maybe 12,000 to 13,000 are enrolled in Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Other devices we have are either outdated Linux or outdated Windows. We’re trying to migrate all the ones we can, and then some of them will be those narrow use-case devices where it wouldn't really make sense or be feasible for them to have a definitive cloud. They're limited processing power devices, like iPads and tablets.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The solution has good dashboards."
"It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn. It's cloud-based, so you don't need to buy or maintain any hardware infrastructure."
"It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
"Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled."
"When we started out, our secure score was pretty low. We adopted some of the recommendations that Security Center set out and we were able to make good progress on improving it. It had been in the low thirties and is now in the upper eighties."
"It has seamless integration with any of the services I mentioned, on Azure, such as IaaS platforms, virtual machines, applications, or databases, because it's an in-house product from Microsoft within the Azure ecosystem."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the insights, meaning the remediation suggestions, as well as the incident alerts."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
 

Cons

"The management can be improved."
"I would say that Azure's customer service is not that good...I am not very happy with the support offered."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"You cannot create custom use cases."
"Another thing that could be improved was that they could recommend processes on how to react to alerts, or recommend best practices based on how other organizations do things if they receive an alert about XYZ."
"Azure's system could be more on point like AWS support. For example, if I have an issue with AWS, I create a support ticket, then I get a call or a message. With Azure support, you raise a ticket, and somebody calls back depending on their availability and the priority, which might not align with your business priority."
"The product must improve its UI."
"The solution could extend its capabilities to other cloud providers. Right now, if you want to monitor a virtual machine on another cloud, you can do that. However, this cannot be done with other cloud platform services. I hope once that is available then Defender for Cloud will be a unified solution for all cloud platform services."
"As an analyst, there is no way to configure or create a playbook to automate the process of flagging suspicious domains."
"When you work with it, the only problem that we're struggling with is that we have 21 different subscriptions we're trying to apply security to. It's impossible to keep everything organized."
"Microsoft sources most of their threat intelligence internally, but I think they should open themselves up to bodies that provide feel intelligence to build a better engine. There may be threats out there that they don't report because their team is not doing anything on that and they don't have arrangements with another party that is involved in that research."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"I give the pricing a nine out of ten."
"We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft and the pricing is good."
"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."
"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"There are improvements that have to be made to the licensing. Currently, for servers, it has to be done by grouping the servers on a single subscription... We don't have an option whereby, if all those resources are in one subscription, we can have each of the individual servers subject to different planning."
"Defender for Cloud is pretty costly for a single line. It's incredibly high to pay monthly for security per server. The cost is considerable for an enterprise with 500-plus virtual machines, and the monthly bill can spike."
"This solution is more cost-effective than some competing products. My understanding is that it is based on the number of integrations that you have, so if you have fewer subscriptions then you pay less for the service."
"It is bundled with our enterprise subscription, which makes it easy to go for it. It is available by default, and there is no extra cost for using the standard features."
"Azure Defender is definitely pricey, but their competitors cost about the same. For example, a Palo Alto solution is the same price per endpoint, but the ground strikes cost a bit more than Azure Defender. Still, it's pricey for a company like ours. Maybe well-established organizations can afford it, but it might be too costly for a startup."
"Although I am outside of the discussion on budget and costing, I can say that the importance of security provided by this solution is of such importance that whatever the cost is, it is not a factor."
"The pricing is very difficult because every type of Defender for Cloud has its own metrics and pricing. If you have Cloud for Key Vault, the pricing is different than it is for storage. Every type has its own pricing list and rules."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Web Application Firewall?
The pricing is quite high. It's not cheap. The free version doesn't have the capability a user would need.
What needs improvement with Azure Web Application Firewall?
The documentation needs to be improved. It's not ideal. There are multiple deployment options. However, there is a lack of clarity around them. There's no real community to reach out to and no vide...
How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?
Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening across your ecosystem. It also has great remote workforce capabilities and supports a...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Microsoft needs to bring the cost down. What we're doing to their detriment is simply lowering the amount of log retention we're...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.