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

Azure Web Application Firewall vs Microsoft Defender for IoT comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
13
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (13th)
Microsoft Defender for IoT
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
28th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (5th), Operational Technology (OT) Security (6th)
 

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 for IoT is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Mano Senaratne - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
William Tuleja - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration with existing tools boosts management efficiency
The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong. Often, it just links back to a generic KB article without additional information. When it happens, it requires extra detective work. This issue doesn't occur often but can be annoying.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."
"Configuration is much easier than using different platforms."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"It's great for protecting against DDoS attacks."
"The solution has good dashboards."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"It is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
"Mainly, it is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
"I find Microsoft Defender very effective in vulnerability management and it provides good attack reduction, making it a next-generation protection solution."
"I believe it is best suited for cloud services and is unmatched by other cloud security solutions."
 

Cons

"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"I would say that Azure's customer service is not that good...I am not very happy with the support offered."
"From my point of view, there is no need for improvement."
"The knowledge base could be improved."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"The management can be improved."
"Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic."
"Customer service and support from Microsoft are costly. The execution by engineers is expensive, and the service is neither free nor toll-free, making it less accessible for customers."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
"The primary area that needs improvement is compatibility with the latest IoT technologies."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
 

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."
"The price is reasonable. It is approximately $2,000 US per month."
"I give the pricing a nine out of ten."
"We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft and the pricing is good."
"The price is for this solution is fair and there is a license needed."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
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
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for IoT?
The solution is relatively expensive with licensing being based on each device. The cost per license might not be affordable for every organization, and I would rate it around six out of ten on a s...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for IoT?
The primary area that needs improvement is compatibility with the latest IoT technologies. Microsoft needs flexibility to ensure good compatibility with new IoT solutions, which frequently introduc...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender for IoT?
My primary use case for Microsoft Defender for IoT is security. It helps with vulnerability management and provides significant attack reduction. It functions as a next-generation protection soluti...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Azure Defender for IoT
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender for IoT and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
847,625 professionals have used our research since 2012.