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 solution is easy to set up."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway gives us a lot of benefits, including domain mapping."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities."
"I like the tool's stability and performance."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"NGINX App Protect's best features are auto-learning, which creates a profile of applications that are deployed, bot protection, and force protection, which lets you configure your brute force policy and alert for and prevent brute force attacks."
"I tested specific features and evaluated the solution against the Web Application Firewall. I conducted research to test different detection percentages. I did not use it directly for protection but for evaluation purposes."
"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."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"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."
"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
"The product's performance should be better."
"In the next release, the solution could improve the integration with Service Mesh and other Azure Security Services."
"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."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"The price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
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.