Azure Web Application Firewall vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management comparison

Azure Web Application Firewall and Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management are both solutions in the Microsoft Security Suite category. Azure Web Application Firewall is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.4, while Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management is ranked #34 with an average rating of 7.5. Azure Web Application Firewall holds a 1.9% mindshare in Microsoft Security Suite, compared to Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management’s 0.2% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of Azure Web Application Firewall users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management users who would recommend it.

Azure Web Application Firewall

Read 13 Azure Web Application Firewall reviews

1,211 Views
1,010 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Microsoft Defender External...

Read 2 Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management reviews

108 Views
69 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure Web Application Firewall

Microsoft Defender External...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Azure Web Application Firewall and Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 847,625 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Azure Web Application Firewall

Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite

20th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (13th)

Microsoft Defender External...

Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite

34th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Attack Surface Management (ASM) (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Web Application Firewall is 1.9%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Microsoft Security Suite

Featured Reviews

Mano Senaratne

Management Consultant at a consultancy with 201-500 employees

Comprehensive suite simplifies configuration while frequent updates require management

Mainly, it comes with the complete suite of Microsoft services. I can use it in conjunction with the best options and other features that come with it. Configuration is much easier than using different platforms. For example, if I have hosted the application in AWS and am using the Application Firewall from Azure, there are certain additional steps to follow when configuring them. With Microsoft, everything is within a single suite, making it easier to configure and plan. Azure continually upgrades platforms and sends us messages to upgrade to the next version, simplifying the process. Later, it's much easier if I want to upgrade the software platform, scale it, or move it to a different application host as the whole suite comes together. The return on investment is good. If I am doing applications for clients, I can invoice them for better costs. Most applications that I run and use have a better return on investment.

Read full review

AndyChan3

General manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees

Enhanced visibility and exposes vulnerabilities but needs more integration

I am currently in the pilot stage of implementing Microsoft External Attack Surface Management (EASM). My organization is transitioning to a comprehensive track of Microsoft solutions, and we will move to full-scale production in another year, maybe Microsoft External Attack Surface Management…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Azure WAF is extremely stable."

"The most valuable feature of Azure Web Application Firewall is its ability to filter requests and block false positives by using custom rules and the OWASP rule set."

"The solution has good dashboards."

"I can only strongly recommend using the Azure Web Application Firewall."

"It's great for protecting against DDoS attacks."

"The integration it has with GitHub is great."

"It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."

"It is almost impossible to access these assets from outside, requiring a very skilled attacker to obtain asset tokens of a customer using Azure."

More Azure Web Application Firewall pros

"Microsoft External Attack Surface Management helps improve the visibility of my exposed vulnerabilities and provides an overview of my security posture across the globe."

"It seems to be better at protecting from cyberattacks."

"Microsoft External Attack Surface Management helps improve the visibility of my exposed vulnerabilities and provides an overview of my security posture across the globe."

Cons

"We would like to see additional site services using AI to provide information about blocking requests and offer analytics on the origin of calls."

"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."

"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."

"Some Azure applications, like the web application firewall, require a certain level of SKU for hosting setup. The basic setup does not allow me to use the web application firewall and other additional services."

"The knowledge base could be improved."

"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."

"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."

"I would say that Azure's customer service is not that good...I am not very happy with the support offered."

More Azure Web Application Firewall cons

"With Microsoft, support is always crazy, it's not easy to get support."

"The integration is not as seamless compared to competitors like Palo Alto."

"Further integration across different Microsoft products would be an improvement."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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 is reasonable. It is approximately $2,000 US per month."

"The price is for this solution is fair and there is a license needed."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

847,625 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Web Application Firewall?

The integration it has with GitHub is great.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Web Application Firewall?

The pricing is okay at the moment. Sometimes, when opting for a higher SKU, it's not the WAF itself that's costly but the additional requirements. A higher SKU application hosting platform adds to ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Azure Web Application Firewall?

While using it, I identified certain areas where it would have been good to have additional features. Right now, I can't recall any specific instances. Seamless integration is good, yet having mult...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management?

I rate the pricing of the solution as eight out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management?

Further integration across different Microsoft products would be an improvement. Introduction of more AI automation into the products would also be beneficial. The integration is not as seamless co...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management?

See all answers

Comparisons

AWS WAF vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 40% of the time

Fortinet FortiWeb vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 13% of the time

Azure Front Door vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 6% of the time

Akamai App and API Protector vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 4% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 4% of the time

More Azure Web Application Firewall Competitors

Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

Compared 23% of the time

Tenable Attack Surface Management vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

Compared 20% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

Compared 12% of the time

Bitsight vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

Compared 12% of the time

Mandiant Advantage vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

Compared 10% of the time

More Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall

April 2025

Download Azure Web Application Firewall product report

Buyer's Guide

Attack Surface Management (ASM)

April 2025

Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management report

Download Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management product report

Overview

Azure Web Application Firewall (WAF) provides centralized protection of your web applications from common exploits and vulnerabilities. Web applications are increasingly targeted by malicious attacks that exploit commonly known vulnerabilities. SQL injection and cross-site scripting are among the most common attacks.

To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.

Microsoft

In this era of hybrid work, shadow IT creates an increasingly serious security risk. Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management helps cloud security teams see unknown and unmanaged resources outside the firewall.

Microsoft

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

February 2025

Free Report: Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

847,625 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management report.

See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.

We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.