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

Azure Web Application Firewall vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Web Application Firewall
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
20th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (13th)
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
186
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (1st), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (2nd), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Web Application Firewall is 1.7%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 8.7%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Thomas Zebar - PeerSpot reviewer
May 4, 2023
Is priced well, is stable, and the initial setup is straightforward
I previously used Barracuda Web Application Firewall. I hope that Azure Web Application Firewall will look at other products and replicate some of their functionality. Azure WAF is doing great because it is designed to host web applications in Azure. However, it can be improved with other services. Barracuda is the most advanced firewall in the industry, so Azure WAF could pick some of its features and replicate them into its own application firewall. Barracuda WAF was deployed in parallel to the traffic. Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic. It should support both public and private points of presence. Additionally, like Barracuda, Azure WAF should have an inspection engine that covers not just Microsoft products, but also products from other manufacturers. This would be a great addition to the product and would increase its security functionality.
Sudhen Swami - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 26, 2024
Easy to update with good protection and a useful cloud portal
We've mainly used it for endpoints. However, we've also used it for DLP as well. We're also in the process of implementing it for cloud and identity as well. However, it's very good for endpoints, and that's our main focus. The malware protection is good. The visibility it provides is very useful. We can combine visibility with wider security features and alerts around malware, misconfiguration, or any other kinds of threats. The cloud portal is quite good. From there, we are able to see alerts and have colleagues review issues and monitor to see if any patterns arise. It's serving us quite well overall. It allows us to look at other items, like application and browser control. It helps us prioritize threats. We have a process in place now where we can review issues and remediate them effectively. We have been able to integrate a variety of Microsoft security products together. We use Azure AD, for example, and we've begun to implement DLP, among other items. We're looking at labeling and tagging and will expand into that soon. Defender has more stringent system requirements than, for example, Check Point. So when we implemented the Check Point Endpoint agent, that solution didn't mind what version of Windows you were using. When we moved to Defender, Defender had certain system prerequisites that had to be met. So we had to make sure that we're on a minimum version of Windows when we're utilizing Office, and Office has to be a particular version as well. It has more stringent system requirements that have to be met before you can implement it. It works natively together with other Microsoft solutions. Once you get more and more of those different components across the environment, then you start to get better visibility. So, rather than having lots of different solutions, you have fewer solutions and a single vendor solution. That way, you start getting into a position where you get better visibility and integration as well. The standardization is good. It's important. It's helping me with monitoring and learning. Updates and upgrades are quite smooth and seamless. Defender helps us automate routine tasks. Quite a lot of Microsoft is straightforward for us now. Previously, we didn't have enough resources and were unable to look at the alerts. Having this in place makes things a lot more straightforward for us. We have both the technology and the people in place now, alongside the process. We do see the benefits in that, and that's why we're continuing our adoption across the estate in terms of client and server as well. It's helping us avoid looking at multiple dashboards and centralized monitoring. We're not fully there yet. We're getting there. While we haven't witnessed time saving yet, once it's fully deployed, it will. By then, we'll have standardized processes across a single solution. We have saved money, however, as we continue to reduce non-Mircosft systems. Since we won't be using various competing technologies, we can save on licensing costs. We've likely so far saved 15%. While it's hard to estimate exactly how much, the solution has helped us decrease time to detection and time to respond.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"The solution has good dashboards."
"It's great for protecting against DDoS attacks."
"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."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"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."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"It is a straightforward setup."
"This is not an inventory solution, but it helps you take count of how many workstations you have, as well as what software is installed on each of them."
"Defender works in the background monitoring the traffic for viruses."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"Provides good vulnerability assessment."
"It performs well. The stability is seamless."
"Stable endpoint manager, antivirus, and antimalware, with fast technical support and a straightforward setup."
"For threat-hunting, I'll put some threats in a test scenario. I've downloaded known viruses that are out in the public for testing. They're not really a virus but they've got a signature. Defender for Endpoint will automatically find those, quarantine them for me, and alert me to what it did. It gives me "automated eyes.""
 

Cons

"The management can be improved."
"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."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"We would like to see additional site services using AI to provide information about blocking requests and offer analytics on the origin of calls."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"This solution is not secure, which is why I have moved to Linux."
"They're in the process of pulling more things together. They can continue with the integrations and provide a better way of seeing the impact of security changes, especially on the endpoint side. Before we actually flip the switch, we should be able to see the impact of security changes on the business or business applications. It would prevent breaking any business applications."
"I would like to see online updates for patches for this solution. I would also like to see online information about what is trending in the market in terms of spams, viruses, or trojans. It takes some time to understand how this solution works. A few things are unclear at the beginning, such as whether it actually restricts the virus or spam at the initial stage, or when there is a security update, how will we come to know and how will it get synchronized. It would be really helpful if there is some kind of knowledge base in the form of video, audio, or document that can explain in a user-friendly way the setup, features, risks, and process to mitigate the risks. Currently, I have installed endpoint security for every individual system. I could not install it like other endpoint solutions where we have a server and a client. It would be really helpful if Microsoft Windows Defender has a server-client based model so that I can save some bandwidth when it downloads or uploads features. It will be helpful if we have a LAN-based or WAN-based controlling system."
"The documentation could be better. When they update their manuals, sometimes they refer to products by their old names, so it is a little confusing. For example, the documentation might still say "Advanced Threat Protection" instead of Defender for Endpoint."
"We'd like to see integrations with more vulnerability scanning solutions like Tenable."
"The system can always be simplified and have a better integration check. More detailed reports would be good. When it does the integrated check, it just shows if the system is okay but I want to know what happened."
"Defender's cloud integration could be improved."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The price is reasonable. It is approximately $2,000 US per month."
"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."
"The price is for this solution is fair and there is a license needed."
"The solution comes free with Microsoft Windows 10."
"We went for Microsoft Defender once we were informed that it would be part of our Office 365 package. So, we combined the licensing for the OS with Office 365. Yeah. We thought it was a good bargain."
"Microsoft Defender is an expensive product in my country."
"The price was a problem for me three years ago, but they improved their E3, E5, and a la carte licensing. In other words, you have to get all of E5. That used to be a problem because you had E3, Defender, and guardrails, but you needed an E5 license to get the management suite and the analytics. It's more flexible now. You can switch from a la carte to the entire suite when it starts to make sense. It's becoming more economically competitive to go that route."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is cost-effective because there's one unified license, and with this unified license, you get the capabilities for your cloud applications, servers, and endpoints as well. Therefore, it saves us a lot of money because the cost with other solutions is for just one piece of OS or maybe an urban environment. The licensing process is not complex as well."
"Microsoft Defender ATP is expensive."
"You just pay Windows 10 prices, then you have antivirus software. As a price comparison, Defender's costs are very low."
"We pay a yearly license for Microsoft Defender. We also have a support contract with them."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Educational Organization
26%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
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 price is reasonable. It is approximately $2,000 US per month. This cost is one of the main reasons why we selected Azure Web Application Firewall. It provides enough functionality for our needs.
What needs improvement with Azure Web Application Firewall?
Microsoft is constantly working on improvements. We would like to see additional site services using AI to provide information about blocking requests and offer analytics on the origin of calls. Th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
Which offers better endpoint security - Symantec or Microsoft Defender?
We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior solution. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security s...
How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?
The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never push your machine hardware to "test", you don't have the usual "scan now" feature ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.