AWS WAF and Azure Application Gateway compete in web application security, with Azure often seen as superior due to advanced features. Users find Azure's extensive capabilities a worthwhile investment despite AWS's cost advantages.
Features: Azure Application Gateway is known for ease of deployment, advanced integration with Azure Active Directory, auto-scaling, and traffic routing. AWS WAF offers customizable rules, cloud-native deployment, and integrates seamlessly with other AWS services.
Room for Improvement: AWS WAF could enhance automation, customer support, simplify configuration, and improve rule management and pricing. Azure Application Gateway users seek improvements in the user interface, documentation, competitive pricing, and advanced security features like DDoS protection.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Azure's integration within the Azure ecosystem simplifies accessibility, whereas AWS WAF benefits from its immediate cloud-native capabilities. Both solutions provide customer support; however, AWS's support complexity and costs can be off-putting, while Azure's straightforward support might incur additional expenses.
Pricing and ROI: AWS WAF offers a cost-effective pay-as-you-go model, especially for AWS users, while Azure Application Gateway presents higher costs effective for large-scale projects. Both deliver strong ROI, but Azure's pricing can escalate with usage.
For the small project I was working on, using the basic tier provided a huge improvement at zero cost.
In terms of return on investment with Cloudflare, it costs my time to set them up, but basically once they're set up, it's done.
With AWS WAF, it is easier for us to block unwanted malicious DDoS attacks and threats from coming into our web application.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway significantly impacts our cost savings while maintaining higher performance.
We have seen a return on investment in terms of time-saving and cost-saving by not creating our own infrastructure.
Cloudflare does not offer hands-on technical support to fix customer problems but rather a self-service model.
I would rate the technical support with Cloudflare as excellent every time I've had to call them.
I have primarily worked not with the tool's customer support but with the product's sales engineers and technical sales engineers, who seem to know their stuff.
Resolving issues can take time because the support personnel may lack product expertise, leading to delays.
They reach out when you send them a ticket, and within 24 hours or less, someone is able to get back to you to solve your problem.
There is room for improvement, specifically in paid support, by providing more direct contact.
I would rate Microsoft support as good because they have a very skilled technical support team in the background
It is a SaaS tool, but the fact that they have workloads deployed across the world proves that it is a highly scalable tool.
The tool offers very good performance, even during high-traffic periods.
I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.
AWS WAF does scale in the sense that it is fully managed and has automatic scaling.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a very scalable product.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a scalable solution.
I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.
The service is very stable with no impacts during high-traffic periods.
Since it protects web applications from common attacks such as SQL injection and XSS, it is very stable.
In terms of reliability, I would rate AWS WAF about six out of ten due to the need for improved signature sets.
We faced issues with AWS WAF when writing the custom rules.
The stability is good, and except for a few instances, I don't see the non-availability of Azure Cloud services.
Despite these challenges, overall, Cloudflare remains the preferred solution compared to Azure, AWS CloudFront, and Google Cloud Armor.
Areas like how assessment, discovery, and payload are dealt with and how it all comes into your organization can be considered when trying to make suggestions to Cloudflare for improvements.
There are some performance considerations when it comes to dynamic content that involves fetching data from databases or using APIs.
Compared to firewalls, WAFs generally provide limited stateful analysis capabilities.
The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information.
Features like bot protection or DDoS mitigation, available with other WAF vendors, do not come natively with AWS WAF.
There is room for improvement in terms of support, such as assigning agents directly for more straightforward engagement.
In future releases of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I would like to see more AI functionalities and a better dashboard as well as some customizations.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has room for improvement because it offers many features, but its configuration is a bit difficult, at least from the developer point of view.
I find it to be cheap.
I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.
The tool is a premium product, so it is very expensive.
Due to our status as an AWS shop, AWS WAF is cost-effective for us, and we benefit from discounts due to our extensive use of AWS services.
The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
Azure solutions are quite expensive.
When it comes to pricing for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I would rate it a seven out of ten.
The most valuable features of the solution are performance and security.
Techniques like minification and image compression reduce the size of assets, leading to better performance and faster user load times.
The solution has been able to compare it to the market, and I think the product has taken great strides in automating quite a bit of things, and they use a lot of AI.
The biggest benefit of AWS WAF for us is to filter malicious requests, so we can protect our environment and application from malicious actors.
It has also helped to improve the posture of our application, prevent all DDoS attacks, and unnecessary traffic and SQL injection that is reducing the performance of our application.
The cloud-native nature of AWS is crucial since most of our workload is in AWS, making AWS WAF native to Amazon Web Services.
We are using it for some of the security features for our applications, particularly for securing traffic in transit with SSL.
The Web Application Firewall (WAF) in Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has been very effective in protecting applications from security threats.
The gateway's Web Application Firewall feature enhances security as it is the first entry point to your network from the outside world.


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 46 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 8 |
| Large Enterprise | 25 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 22 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 26 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 22 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 6 |
| Large Enterprise | 23 |
Cloudflare enhances web performance and security with features like CDN caching and DDoS mitigation while providing easy DNS management and intuitive setup through its user-friendly dashboard.
Cloudflare is recognized for its comprehensive web security and performance solutions. Speed improvements are achieved through caching mechanisms and DDoS protection, combining ease of DNS management with flexible page rules. The robust analytics and threat insight tools provide valuable data, assisted by a user-friendly dashboard allowing quick setup and configuration. An API offers dynamic DNS settings ensuring low latency and high performance across the globe.
What are Cloudflare's key features?Cloudflare finds utility across industries for DNS management and defense mechanisms. Its content delivery network assures fast content distribution and fortified security. Businesses integrate features like web application firewalls, load balancing, end-to-end SSL, and zero trust to protect websites from cyber threats while ensuring resilience and reliable performance.
AWS Web Application Firewall (WAF) is a firewall security system that monitors incoming and outgoing traffic for applications and websites based on your pre-defined web security rules. AWS WAF defends applications and websites from common Web attacks that could otherwise damage application performance and availability and compromise security.
You can create rules in AWS WAF that can include blocking specific HTTP headers, IP addresses, and URI strings. These rules prevent common web exploits, such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting. Once defined, new rules are deployed within seconds, and can easily be tracked so you can monitor their effectiveness via real-time insights. These saved metrics include URIs, IP addresses, and geo locations for each request.
AWS WAF Features
Some of the solution's top features include:
Reviews from Real Users
AWS WAF stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its user-friendly interface and its integration capabilities.
Kavin K., a security analyst at M2P Fintech, writes, “I believe the most impressive features are integration and ease of use. The best part of AWS WAF is the cloud-native WAF integration. There aren't any hidden deployments or hidden infrastructure which we have to maintain to have AWS WAF. AWS maintains everything; all we have to do is click the button, and WAF will be activated. Any packet coming through the internet will be filtered through.”
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.
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.