Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Azure Front Door vs Barracuda Web Application Firewall comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Front Door
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
CDN (2nd), Microsoft Security Suite (15th)
Barracuda Web Application F...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Azure Front Door is 4.3%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Barracuda Web Application Firewall is 2.0%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Thomas Zebar - PeerSpot reviewer
May 4, 2023
Provides great security with a good application firewall
The initial setup is straightforward. If you want to use the portal, CLI, or PowerShare, or you want to use automation data for one month, it's straightforward. Even when it comes to operational maintenance, it's pretty easy and straightforward. Microsoft has done a great job on that front. Maintenance generally requires someone who is a cloud administrator or similar to maintain services in general, with Front Door a small piece of a larger maintenance requirement. There's not a lot to manage, the configuration is simple. I encourage people to document the configuration and infrastructure as well as disaster recovery in case anything happens.
Carlo Bertini - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 8, 2023
Provides strong issue discovery capabilities; enhance the security parameters of web applications and suitable for medium to large enterprises
The Barracuda support depends. Sometimes, they solve the issue promptly, but normally, they are not so fast and are not entirely focused on the problem. For example, sometimes I write many requests on the tickets, asking for one, two, three, or four steps and asking for one to three resolutions. Often, they respond with only one or two. So, I need to push again and again. In other cases, I ask questions and get positive feedback immediately, depending on who the technician is. Barracuda has engineers in the USA, UK, and other countries, so it depends on the technician's location and expertise. So, I am not completely satisfied, but sometimes it is okay, and sometimes it is not okay. So, depending on the region and depending on the person who actually receives these tickets, the technical support could be more knowledgeable. So they may need some training or education for the entire staff to respond immediately without any delays. Often, it happens that they respond because they need to, not because they understand the technology I'm using. So they respond just because it's required by the service level agreement, which specifies a response time within four hours. But this is just a response, not a resolution of the case. Sometimes, the response is within the agreed time, but the solution takes much longer.

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 I can have CDN and load-balancing capabilities in a single service instead of managing two separate tools."
"It inspects the traffic at the network level before it comes into Azure. We can do SSL offloading, and it can detect abnormalities before the traffic comes into the application. It can be used globally and is easy to set up. It is also quite stable and scalable."
"You can assign as many web application firewall policies as you want to the same instance of Front Door."
"I am impressed with the tool's integrations."
"The most valuable feature is that you can implement resources globally. It does not depend on location and ability or something like that. This is to connect clients around the world."
"The tool is easy to use for beginners."
"Rules Engine is a valuable feature."
"The price is one of the most important aspects of the product. It's quite affordable."
"I find the solution very stable."
"Parameter Protection is a valuable feature."
"It allows us to scale out to multiple phase servers."
"The solution has been quite stable. It's reliable."
"It is stable and the performance is good."
"There is no one special feature, but the WAF itself is valuable: user-friendly protection against web attacks etc., authentication, reporting, accountability, alerting, and hardened OS."
"The most valuable feature is the automatic content filtering."
"What I like most about Barracuda Web Application Firewall is its availability. I also like that it's an easy-to-use solution."
 

Cons

"The product's features are limited compared to Cloudflare. The tool also doesn't work well in a hybrid environment. I would like to see a way to add personalized APIs in the system."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"The tool should improve its cost."
"There is room for improvement and they're working on it."
"There's a limitation on the amount of global rules we can add."
"This is a relatively expensive solution."
"We should be able to use Front Door defenders with multiple cloud vendors. Currently, they can be used only with the Azure cloud. Azure Front Door should also be able to do global load balancing and provide internal front door services. Microsoft should clearly define what Traffic Manager, Application Gateway, and Azure Front Door products do. These are similar products, and people get confused between these products."
"It lacks sufficient functionality."
"I would like to see better controlling of the traffic."
"There are issues when upgrading firewalls and we experience different issues across customers."
"An area for improvement in Barracuda Web Application Firewall is attack identification. Other banks identified attacks and tracked logs that the solution wasn't able to identify because of its ready-made rules pre-deployed by the vendor. My organization raised this issue with the technical support team. Another area to improve in Barracuda Web Application Firewall is its service desk. The team resorted to stonewalling because they couldn't accept that a feature was missing in the solution, and it was only after a lot of drilling down that the service desk team accepted that, and would be adding that feature in the future. My organization had to submit a report to the Reserve Bank of India with information on the logs identified and the attacks that happened, and that there was a failure on the part of the Barracuda Web Application Firewall. The Reserve Bank of India conducts a tri-monthly cyber risk audit in all Indian banks. Even smaller banks identified and caught attacks that my organization wasn't able to do, so I was looking into other solutions that competitor banks could be using because Barracuda Web Application Firewall failed to identify some of the attacks."
"The documentation is lacking. It's not like what you'd get if you were using Juniper or Cisco. They need to expand on it and make it more useful."
"There are some vulnerabilities that are reported across the tools offered by Barracuda for some devices, which need to be taken care of from an improvement perspective."
"While the UI is good, it can get a little bit complicated."
"This product could easily progress to be among the industry leaders. I think they need to improve enterprise level automation. It integrates with a small number of vulnerability scanners, so report results should be imported manually; same for SIEM integration."
"The solution could use more reports."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Considering the standard licensing of the tool, even though we have not checked the billing as of now, it might not be very costly."
"It is on a pay-as-you-go basis."
"The transition to the premium tier has led to increased costs, making it more expensive than the classic tier."
"The product is expensive."
"The pricing of the solution is good."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
"The product is inexpensive."
"Our licensing fees are paid annually and the cost is between €600 and €800 (approximately $665.00 to $885.00 USD)."
"They have competitive pricing."
"Cost is a bit on the higher side. Big companies can afford it."
"The Barracuda Web Application Firewall is quite expensive."
"The pricing is less compared to other web applications."
"In my opinion, the product is fairly priced."
"The price of this solution is okay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Educational Organization
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What's the difference between Azure Front Door and Application Gateway?
We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Front Door?
It's a matter of value versus price. If we add more features and raise the price, it must remain justifiable. If we maintain the current set of reasonable features and keep the pricing competitive,...
What do you like most about Barracuda Web Application Firewall?
It significantly improved our overall web security posture, addressing intrusions and enhancing control over web URLs in our environment.
What is your primary use case for Barracuda Web Application Firewall?
I use the solution in my company to protect our website.
 

Also Known As

Azure Front-Door
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Oracle, CBS, Pioneer, Hyundai, Publix, Barnes Noble, Calzedonia, Nordstrom, Samsung, Nascar
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Front Door vs. Barracuda Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.