Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs SonicWall Web Application Firewall comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and SonicWall Web Application Firewall 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 Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. SonicWall Web Application Firewall Report (Updated: March 2024).
771,157 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Abdelrahman Anwar
Narender Reddy
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date.""We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled.""WAF feature replicates the firewall.""The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use.""Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort.""The pricing is quite good.""The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway are the policies, the data store they are using, and the cloud platform it operates on.""The solution is easy to set up."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pros →

"The solution offers better data protection than competitors.""Capture ATP is a good additional feature in the latest version.""We use SonicWall Web Application Firewall for security and tunneling."

More SonicWall Web Application Firewall Pros →

Cons
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port.""Scalability can be an issue.""It takes a lot of time for a certificate to update in the system. That is a huge drawback, affecting the load-balancing side. And when there are changes to the load balancing, it affects the end-user.""It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me.""It could be easier to change servicing.""The solution has many limitations. You cannot upgrade the VPN to the application gateway. So I started with version one, which has limited capabilities, and they provided version two. And unfortunately, I cannot upgrade from v one to v two like other services. So I have to decommission the version one and create a new one with version two. Also the version one was complex with the certificates uploading the SQL certificates.""For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved.""The solution could improve by increasing the performance when doing updates. For example, if I change the certificate it can take 30 minutes. Other vendors do not have this type of problem."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Cons →

"The solution needs an access management feature with API integration so we can assign certain levels of access within groups.""We should get the logs from the solution, and it should communicate with the local DNS.""We have a lot of unknown errors popping up in the latest version."

More SonicWall Web Application Firewall Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is not expensive."
  • "Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."
  • "Between v1 and v2, there is a lot of change in the pricing. It is very costly compared to AWS."
  • "There is some additional cost, such as extended support."
  • "The cost is not an issue."
  • "The solution is reasonably priced compared to other solutions."
  • "The pricing is based on how much you use the solution."
  • "The solution is paid monthly. The solution is highly expensive."
  • More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
    771,157 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the… more »
    Top Answer:Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit for… more »
    Top Answer:I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily.
    Top Answer:We use SonicWall Web Application Firewall for security and tunneling.
    Top Answer:We should get the logs from the solution, and it should communicate with the local DNS. There is some lag in the solution's technical support response time.
    Top Answer:Our company uses the solution to protect our website that is for internal resources only and does not allow enterprise access.
    Ranking
    Views
    14,238
    Comparisons
    12,302
    Reviews
    23
    Average Words per Review
    363
    Rating
    7.3
    Views
    158
    Comparisons
    114
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    293
    Rating
    9.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
    Learn More
    Overview

    Azure Application Gateway is a web traffic load balancer that enables you to manage traffic to your web applications. Traditional load balancers operate at the transport layer (OSI layer 4 - TCP and UDP) and route traffic based on source IP address and port, to a destination IP address and port.

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

    The SonicWall Web Application Firewal l (WAF) solutions enables the defense-in-depth strategy to protect your web applications running in a private, public or hybrid cloud environment. compromise the application, steal data and/or cause a denial-of-service.

    Sample Customers
    Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
    AMANZIMTOTI HIGH SCHOOL
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company30%
    Comms Service Provider19%
    Financial Services Firm7%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Government7%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business38%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise48%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise64%
    No Data Available
    Buyer's Guide
    Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. SonicWall Web Application Firewall
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. SonicWall Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    771,157 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews while SonicWall Web Application Firewall is ranked 25th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 3 reviews. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2, while SonicWall Web Application Firewall is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall Web Application Firewall writes "A stable and durable solution that can be used for security and tunneling". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas SonicWall Web Application Firewall is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. SonicWall Web Application Firewall 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.