I don't have much hands-on practical experience with Azure Firewall, but I have managed the network rule and application rule. I have not utilized the advanced threat protection in Azure Firewall Manager. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Azure Firewall Manager a six.
Microsoft autoscaling service is very good and easy to use, allowing us to scale our hardware, memory, and CPU. We can automate both vertical and horizontal scaling based on our needs. We're a partner of Microsoft. I have only used Azure Firewall Manager for basic purposes, and I would give it a rating of 8.5 out of 10.
Enterprise solutions architect at InfoDeltaSys Software Solutions (OPC) Pvt. Ltd.
Real User
Top 20
Jun 13, 2025
I have worked on many monitoring tools, not only Dynatrace, as I actually work on New Relic, Dynatrace, and Azure Monitor. I'm currently working with Azure Monitor. We basically utilize Azure Firewall Manager from Azure side, the Azure Front Door, which works as CDN, and after that, we are utilizing the Azure API Management. We are utilizing WAF. WAF, we have been utilizing for the last four to five years, which is also part of Azure Front Door. We are utilizing Azure Firewall Manager inside our services, and we are also utilizing the Azure virtual network VNET, where we create it and in the subnet we utilize the security network security groups. The Azure Firewall Manager is utilized outside where we have the landing zone and it works. We are actually creating these policies, which we provide by Azure. Our GSO, that is the global security office we have, is a separate group that manages overall governance and monitoring for our organization's security. The policies provided by Azure network are utilized according to that, which defines the request response and access for the entire application, and these policies really help us. We are not working on the integration with Azure Virtual WAN at this time. We are utilizing the integration on the API gateway to the world. The utilization of PaaS is beneficial because we have thresholds that enable vertical and horizontal scaling. Whenever we utilize any kind of Azure PaaS services, such as function as services or whatever container we have created, we have set up that the policies recognize load levels and automatically scale according to that, so we don't experience any load issues. It is managed by Azure and we take advantage of it. It depends because the pricing is based on the requirement whenever we utilize different regions. For backup purposes, we need to use multiple regions across Asia, Europe, North Europe, UK, and USA. It could be cheaper based on the monthly and yearly costs we bear, and we are under pressure from top management to start cost-cutting and release any unused services over the long term. I would say the resources required are quite less, but time is saved significantly because utilizing automated solutions saves time, especially with Azure's capabilities. It saves both resources and time, but the cost is high. We have approximately 3,000 users working with Azure Firewall Manager. In the IT team, we have around 140 people managing the solution across different groups such as development, DevOps, and database. Overall, there are about 140 to 150 persons. I rate Azure Firewall Manager a ten out of ten.
I recommend Azure Firewall Manager because it automates many tasks that would be hard to do manually, easing the workload for developers and network professionals. I would rate the overall solution as eight out of ten.
We are partners and distributors. We're resellers. I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten, and only due to the lack of the reverse NAT-ing capability. I'd advise a company if they are starting fresh inside Azure Greenfield, this is a good option. However, if they are looking at this solution are migrating or replacing the same network configuration from on-premise to Azure, they will have to modify a lot. If it has to be implemented, especially in a NAT-ed environment, some extra study has to be done.
CIT at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Jun 15, 2021
We have a business application for public cloud and use Azure for this. We also have certain local installations, as well as some other hybrid clouds. So, this varies with the customer requirements. We must comply with customers who do not wish for their data to be outside their premises and for these we restore the system and database locally. Some use public cloud with no problem. Others want the application in the public cloud but their data insights to be on-premises. Consequently, we have different architecture for the same application. We have around five users making use of the solution. I would definitely recommend the solution to my clients, especially if one is using Azure Cloud. It is a very nice product.
Azure Firewall Manager is a security management service that provides central security policy and route management for cloud-based security perimeters.
To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.
I don't have much hands-on practical experience with Azure Firewall, but I have managed the network rule and application rule. I have not utilized the advanced threat protection in Azure Firewall Manager. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Azure Firewall Manager a six.
Microsoft autoscaling service is very good and easy to use, allowing us to scale our hardware, memory, and CPU. We can automate both vertical and horizontal scaling based on our needs. We're a partner of Microsoft. I have only used Azure Firewall Manager for basic purposes, and I would give it a rating of 8.5 out of 10.
I have worked on many monitoring tools, not only Dynatrace, as I actually work on New Relic, Dynatrace, and Azure Monitor. I'm currently working with Azure Monitor. We basically utilize Azure Firewall Manager from Azure side, the Azure Front Door, which works as CDN, and after that, we are utilizing the Azure API Management. We are utilizing WAF. WAF, we have been utilizing for the last four to five years, which is also part of Azure Front Door. We are utilizing Azure Firewall Manager inside our services, and we are also utilizing the Azure virtual network VNET, where we create it and in the subnet we utilize the security network security groups. The Azure Firewall Manager is utilized outside where we have the landing zone and it works. We are actually creating these policies, which we provide by Azure. Our GSO, that is the global security office we have, is a separate group that manages overall governance and monitoring for our organization's security. The policies provided by Azure network are utilized according to that, which defines the request response and access for the entire application, and these policies really help us. We are not working on the integration with Azure Virtual WAN at this time. We are utilizing the integration on the API gateway to the world. The utilization of PaaS is beneficial because we have thresholds that enable vertical and horizontal scaling. Whenever we utilize any kind of Azure PaaS services, such as function as services or whatever container we have created, we have set up that the policies recognize load levels and automatically scale according to that, so we don't experience any load issues. It is managed by Azure and we take advantage of it. It depends because the pricing is based on the requirement whenever we utilize different regions. For backup purposes, we need to use multiple regions across Asia, Europe, North Europe, UK, and USA. It could be cheaper based on the monthly and yearly costs we bear, and we are under pressure from top management to start cost-cutting and release any unused services over the long term. I would say the resources required are quite less, but time is saved significantly because utilizing automated solutions saves time, especially with Azure's capabilities. It saves both resources and time, but the cost is high. We have approximately 3,000 users working with Azure Firewall Manager. In the IT team, we have around 140 people managing the solution across different groups such as development, DevOps, and database. Overall, there are about 140 to 150 persons. I rate Azure Firewall Manager a ten out of ten.
I recommend Azure Firewall Manager because it automates many tasks that would be hard to do manually, easing the workload for developers and network professionals. I would rate the overall solution as eight out of ten.
I recomemnd this soltuion to others. I rate Azure Firewall Manager an eight out of ten.
I would rate the product a seven out of ten.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
We are partners and distributors. We're resellers. I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten, and only due to the lack of the reverse NAT-ing capability. I'd advise a company if they are starting fresh inside Azure Greenfield, this is a good option. However, if they are looking at this solution are migrating or replacing the same network configuration from on-premise to Azure, they will have to modify a lot. If it has to be implemented, especially in a NAT-ed environment, some extra study has to be done.
We have a business application for public cloud and use Azure for this. We also have certain local installations, as well as some other hybrid clouds. So, this varies with the customer requirements. We must comply with customers who do not wish for their data to be outside their premises and for these we restore the system and database locally. Some use public cloud with no problem. Others want the application in the public cloud but their data insights to be on-premises. Consequently, we have different architecture for the same application. We have around five users making use of the solution. I would definitely recommend the solution to my clients, especially if one is using Azure Cloud. It is a very nice product.