F5 Advanced WAF vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway comparison

"I like them because I like the security solution. They get extra marks compared to other solutions or competitors. There are more features than any other product I can think of. They're always monitoring, and the security features offer more than other, lesser products."

"The solution's most valuable features include application DDoS protection, bot blocking, and HTTP header verifications."

"F5's user-friendly interface and seamless integration stand out as the most valuable features for us."

"The most valuable feature of F5 Advanced WAF is its grand unity of the implementation, where you have the freedom to configure based on how it affects your use case or your organization. With the default setting of implicit deny, you can gradually start defining and deploying the tool to align with your environment, whether it is outdated, recent, or futuristic. This allows you to customize the solution to protect you from threat actors. You have the ability to define what the advanced threat act should do - whether it should alert, deny, or both - and it will deliver based on your configuration. Unlike other online solutions, F5 Advanced WAF provides flexibility to deliver to your unique environment the way you want."

"The solution isn't too expensive. The license allows you to license what you need and leave out what you don't need."

"Provides good protection from attacks."

"It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements."

"It can scale."

"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."

"The tool is easy to use and quite flexible. It has policy management features as well. The solution screens all traffic to our web applications before passing it to the application. We recently tested it on one of our poorly developed applications, and the upgrade gave us a 100% result based on our tests. It's very effective as a security measure, and people can detect threats even through the web application."

"The solution has built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure."

"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."

"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."

"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."

"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."

"F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards."

"The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective."

"The contextual-based component needs a lot of help to catch up with the next-gen products."

"There are opportunities for improvement in updating the user interface to a more modern look."

"People who want to work with the device have to be pro in Linux"

"Compatibility with multiple cloud environments needs improvement. Both stability and scalability need to be improved."

"I would not expect traffic details to pass through the web application firewall across the length of the whole application. I think that there is a web application where it can let the application function without traffic going in into the WAF."

"It should be a little bit easy to deploy in terms of the overall deployment session. One of our customers is a bit unhappy about the reporting options. Currently, it automatically deletes event logs after some limit if a customer doesn't have any external Syslog server. It is a problem for those customers who want to review event logs after a week or so because they won't get proper reports or event logs. They should increase the duration to at least a month or two for storing the data on the device. F5 is not a leader in Gartner Quadrant, which affects us when we go and pitch this solution. Customers normally go and take a look at such annual reports, and because F5 is currently not there as a leader, the customers ask about it even though we are saying it is good in all things. F5 is not known for something totally different or unique. They were a major player in ADP, and they are just rebranding themselves into security. They should improve or increase their marketing as a security company now. They have already started to do that, but they should do it more so that when it comes to security, customers can easily remember F5. At the moment, if we say F5, load balancing comes to mind. With rebranding and marketing, all customers should get the idea that F5 is now mainly focusing on the security part of it, and it is a security company instead of load balancing. This is the first solution that should come to a customer's mind for a web application firewall."

"Microsoft needs to work on their documentation."

"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."

"The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team."

"In the next release, the solution could improve the integration with Service Mesh and other Azure Security Services."

"The solution can sometimes feel a little cumbersome unless you're a professional infrastructure person."

"We have encountered some issues with automatic redirection and cancellation, leading to 502 and 504 gateway errors. So, I experienced some trouble with containers."

"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."

"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."

"Licensing fees for this solution are paid on a yearly basis."

"F5 Advanced WAF pricing structure should be adjusted to meet the need of small to medium-sized companies."

"F5 bundles up services and the bundle is what you pay for rather than individual components."

"There is a perpetual license that comes with your hardware. There is also an additional fee for support."

"I would rate the pricing as seven out of ten"

"There are various plans available for Fortinet FortiWeb Cloud WAF as a Service, including a trial version."

"A yearly license for F5 Advanced WAF is expensive."

"The pricing of F5 Advanced WAF is more expensive than other solutions like Radware and CD18, it is quite high."

"The solution is cheaper than Imperva. I rate it four to five out of ten."

"We use the tool's basic subscription. Its licensing costs are monthly."

"Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."

"The tool's pricing model is pay-as-you-go."

"The cost is not an issue."

"It is not expensive."

"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a pretty affordable product. My company needs to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs of the solution. The additional costs apart from the licensing costs of the solution vary."

"The solution's pricing is not complex. It is not expensive from our point of view."