We performed a comparison between Mirantis Container Cloud and NGINX App Protect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Now it is easier to set up the development environment and also to test the applications on the pipelines."
"The most valuable aspect is the excellent support. In addition, the billing system is really easy to understand."
"When you have Kubernetes, you can use Mirantis Container Cloud to manage your Kubernetes for easy access and security. It also helps you to manage your CI/CD system. It helps you to build a container-oriented developer workflow. So, if you're building an application in Kubernetes, it provides you with a Kubernetes engine."
"I like the automation in deployment. I can deploy whenever I want based on the environment, and I can easily roll back to a previous version for testing."
"Docker is very helpful for taking the code from development and applying it to the end user."
"If we compare legacy application support to Docker, it's a superior product."
"I think the volume binding is a really interesting feature."
"Very easy solution to use as it is intuitive."
"We were looking for a product that is capable of complete automation and a container based solution. It's working."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"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 I can establish different services from the firewall."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source."
"There could be an automation feature included in the product. It will speed up application processes and will not require scripting codes."
"There are a couple of things. Firstly, the vaultStore database within Container isn't as efficient as a standalone Container vault. This needs improvement."
"I find Docker easier to use, but I gave it to an inexperienced developer and it took him a lot of time to understand."
"More integrations with other platforms would be beneficial."
"In my previous years, I have brainstormed about the development of Container software. I have recently shifted focus, but the knowledge gained from those were really helpful. In my experience, Containers have their own complexities and to implement them, open source information is crucial. A software with new features would be beneficial. I suggest to implement a flow-based approach for container sequences, similar to Google Cloud's machine learning. The current process of deploying containers involves too many steps, and a more streamlined method would be appreciated. I've even automated deployment using APIs. Overall, simplifying container management and deployment processes would be valuable."
"Areas for improvement are the privacy of container management and the documentation. In the next release, I would like to see best practices on how to manage distributed containers and networks."
"I feel that the product lacks to offer a proper health status of the images which are running, making it an area where improvements are required."
"This product will only be useful if it can successfully run legacy applications in the cloud."
"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 product's user interface is an area with shortcomings as it can be quite confusing for users, making it an area where improvements are required."
"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."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"NGINX App Protect would be improved with integration with Shape and F5 WAF, which would make it easy for users to manage all their web application security with a single solution."
"As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment."
Mirantis Container Cloud is ranked 14th in Container Security with 29 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 20th in Container Security with 19 reviews. Mirantis Container Cloud is rated 8.8, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Mirantis Container Cloud writes "An easy-to-manage solution that helps to manage web pages ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". Mirantis Container Cloud is most compared with SUSE Rancher, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Mirantis Container Cloud vs. NGINX App Protect report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.
