We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and NGINX App Protect 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."The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"The production is a valuable feature."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily."
"It does an excellent job of load balancing."
"We find it valuable because it is compatible with our existing Azure solution."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"It has the best documentation features."
"The policies are flexible based on the technologies you use."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
"The stability of the product is very impressive since it handles 60,000 to 70,000 requests or transactions per second."
"The most valuable feature is that there is a link in the system that will help to analyze the security of an application when something abnormal is found."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"The pricing of the solution is a bit high. The solution should offer different pricing systems."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"The solution is easy to use overall, but the dashboard could be updated with a better layout and graphical design so that we can see the data a bit easier. Microsoft could also add more documentation. The documentation Microsoft provides doesn't tell us about resource requirements. We found that the instances we had weren't sufficient to support the firewall, so we had to increase them."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"It is a bit tricky to configure. You've got to have a very specific format to configure it. They should make it a little bit easier to configure. Mapping the certificates into it isn't easy, and it could be better. Currently, you've to write a bit of automation to pull certificates directly to HTTPS."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team."
"Currently, the policies have to be handled manually, and you have to create from scratch, which can be a bit time-consuming, in a large environment."
"The price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"They could provide a better user interface."
"The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
"Setting policies and parameters through the UI should be more automated because the process is manual, where we can only edit one rule at a time."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 19 reviews. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. 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 NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Amazon Elastic Load Balancing, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Noname Security. See our Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. NGINX App Protect 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.
