Azure Web Application Firewall vs Radware Cloud WAF Service comparison

Microsoft and Radware are both solutions in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category. Microsoft is ranked #13 with an average rating of 8.4, while Radware is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.7. Microsoft holds a 5.4% mindshare in WAF, compared to Radware’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Radware users who would recommend it.

Azure Web Application Firewall

Read 11 Azure Web Application Firewall reviews

4,581 Views
3,822 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Radware Cloud WAF Service

Read 22 Radware Cloud WAF Service reviews

2,156 Views
578 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure Web Application Firewall

Radware Cloud WAF Service

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Azure Web Application Firewall and Radware Cloud WAF Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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. Radware Cloud WAF Service Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Radware Cloud WAF Service

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 816,406 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Azure Web Application Firewall

Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)

13th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Microsoft Security Suite (20th)

Radware Cloud WAF Service

Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)

12th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

8.4

Number of Reviews

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 Web Application Firewall is 5.4%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Radware Cloud WAF Service is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

Featured Reviews

Thomas Zebar

Azure Principal Architect at Cloud Computech Consultancy

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.

Read full review

Gaurav-Mishra

Network Engineer at DXC Technology

Provides features to monitor traffic and quickly identify potential issues but analytic dashboard could be improved

It's mostly for the Alteon service. The Alteon load balancing part, particularly the SSL offloading and WAF offloading, is crucial. Offloading allows us to monitor and identify issues easily. I believe the SSL offloading is the most valuable feature. It's easy to use, and the configurations are similar across different vendors. Compared to F5 and Citrix, Radware is easier to communicate with and use. The configuration process is simple, involving the creation of groups and pools, much like in F5. The SSL offloading is also very easy. Overall, I think it's a good solution. The service we use through the cloud is very easy. We have one dashboard to manage everything, which is convenient.

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

"The most valuable feature is that it allows us to publish our applications behind the firewall."

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

"The integration it has with GitHub is great."

"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."

"It has been a stable product in my experience."

"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."

"The solution has good dashboards."

More Azure Web Application Firewall pros

"DDoS protection is a valuable feature that works efficiently."

"One of the most valuable features we have found in the solution is protection against attacks from botnet networks and the requests that these remote networks can generate that are blocked from our servers. That frees us from having to deal with that traffic."

"The solution requires very little maintenance; we install it, it works without any problems, is reliable, and we can almost forget about it."

"Radware Cloud WAF Service has several valuable features, with good support and a user-friendly GUI."

"Radware Cloud WAF Service is user-friendly and easy to deploy."

"From a financial point of view, we no longer need to appropriate more horsepower to our backend web servers constantly to service these requests because Cloud WAF is preventing malicious bots from accessing our web page. It reduced the load on our backend."

"It provides the first level of defense against external threats trying to come into the environment, but it's one of the many toolkits we use."

"The isolation feature is the most important one because everything is going directly to Radware first and then it goes into our system. What we get is the filtered version of everything that would otherwise come directly to us."

More Radware Cloud WAF Service pros

Cons

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

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

"The management can be improved."

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

"The knowledge base could be improved."

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

"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."

More Azure Web Application Firewall cons

"The connection between the front and back ends could be improved."

"Cloud WAF's management portal lacks many indicators, and the interface could be more user-friendly. It should provide more detailed information on events, possible solutions, and what each event means. While it does give you the event and block part, it doesn't give you a solution. Let's say, for example, someone wants to go into an SQL injection and find a possible solution other than the blocking part, there are no details. It would be good to have possible solutions or the ability to create an automated report to send to the developers in the portal."

"We receive many reports from our security team of IPs flagged by our security tools, such as Palo Alto. I cannot add the file containing the IPs to get them blocked; instead, I have to contact Radware support and open a ticket for them to do it. I need to be able to block flagged IPs myself, as it currently takes more time to open a ticket, contact the support team, and wait four to six hours for a response. I want to be able to upload a file with 2,000-3,000 IPs in the console and then apply and save the configuration."

"Radware's bot manager can be improved because it's very complicated to implement for apps. Radware could also add alerts by WhatsApp or Telegram. It only sends notifications via email or SMS."

"The primary area for improvement is in issue detection and understanding whether a log is a false positive. It can sometimes be a challenge to take the data of a given security event and determine if it's a genuine threat using a Wiki etc."

"Radware does not have much online training available to help customers get the most out of this solution."

"We've had some issues with putting certificates in."

"Radware needs to improve the certificate renewal process for customers who want to be secured with HTTPS."

More Radware Cloud WAF Service cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I give the pricing a nine out of ten."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"We are paying $20,000 annually for six licenses that provide basic WAF functionality."

"For the current market, the price for Radware Cloud WAF Service is exactly where we want it to be."

"When compared to Akamai and F5, Radware's pricing and licensing are highly competitive."

"The pricing is fair. We compared Radware to others using industry reviews and Radware is at the top right now."

"We are based in El Salvador and don't have a direct license with Radware; we purchase the license through resellers. The pricing is reasonable, as I managed an Akamai product in a previous position, and Cloud WAF is competitively priced."

"I believe the prices are fair."

"We evaluated other options and, if I remember correctly, one of them was Fortinet, but they didn't seem as effective as Radware. But the price was the biggest difference. Radware had the best price for our type of network and level of scaling."

"The pricing is fair; it's neither particularly cheap nor expensive."

More Radware Cloud WAF Service pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

816,406 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

Computer Software Company

18%

Retailer

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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 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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Radware Cloud WAF Service?

One of the most valuable features we have found in the solution is protection against attacks from botnet networks and the requests that these remote networks can generate that are blocked from our...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Radware Cloud WAF Service?

I'm not a part of the purchasing team. I do not know about the costs or licensing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Radware Cloud WAF Service?

It needs a better reporting and dashboard to provide better insights.

See all answers

Comparisons

AWS WAF vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 44% of the time

Fortinet FortiWeb vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 12% of the time

Azure Front Door vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 4% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 3% of the time

More Azure Web Application Firewall Competitors

AWS WAF vs Radware Cloud WAF Service

Compared 37% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Radware Cloud WAF Service

Compared 31% of the time

Fortinet FortiWeb vs Radware Cloud WAF Service

Compared 9% of the time

Imperva Web Application Firewall vs Radware Cloud WAF Service

Compared 7% of the time

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Radware Cloud WAF Service

Compared 5% of the time

More Radware Cloud WAF Service Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

November 2024

Download Azure Web Application Firewall product report

Buyer's Guide

Radware Cloud WAF Service

November 2024

Download Radware Cloud WAF Service product report

Learn More

Microsoft

Video not available

Radware

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.

Radware’s Cloud WAF provides enterprise-grade, continuously adaptive web application security protection. Based on Radware’s ICSA Labs certified, market-leading web application firewall, it provides full coverage of OWASP Top-10 threats and zero-day attacks, while implementing both negative and positive web application security models to automatically adapt protections to evolving threats and protected assets.

Radware’s Cloud WAF offers full web security protection including OWASP Top-10 coverage, advanced attack protection and 0-day attack protection by implementing both negative and positive web application security models. It provides organizations “frictionless” application protection by automatically detecting and protecting new web applications as they are added to the network through automatic policy generation technology.

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Radware Cloud WAF Service

October 2024

Free Report: Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Radware Cloud WAF Service

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Radware Cloud WAF Service and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Radware Cloud WAF Service report.

See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.

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.