We performed a comparison between Citrix Web App and API Protection 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 advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is just its graphic user interface for beginners. The solution is nothing special, but we have to use it for the corporation. Another advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is that we have our copy to test things and get the know-how of it."
"I like the solution's simplicity compared to Citrix's on-prem solutions."
"I prefer this solution because of its user-friendly interface. I find it simple and close to what I am currently using, which is Citrix Fortiva Access for Multi-Factor Authentication. I appreciate the familiar user interface and troubleshooting tools it offers."
"Citrix is good for application protection."
"Citrix Web App API Protection allows you to enable a blocking mode"
"When our primary link goes down I can still get to my Cisco devices and the NetScaler devices on-prem because of the SDN solution. If the internet connection at one of the branches goes down, we can still route them, they still get internet based on the SDN solution through one of the other sites. They can carry on working."
"The work balancing applications are the most valuable feature."
"The stability is good. If there is a problem, the load will be shifted to other sites automatically, which has been a good experience for us."
"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."
"We were looking for a product that is capable of complete automation and a container based solution. It's working."
"The policies are flexible based on the technologies you use."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"It has the best documentation features."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"The product could be improved by making it easier to use and easier to implement."
"Their upgrades are not very backward compatible, and sometimes they mess up."
"I am not an expert in this solution, but simplicity and user-friendly interfaces are crucial for me. I would appreciate advice from Citrix, particularly in the form of an interactive guide for API protection. It would be helpful if they could provide specific points and recommendations for cybersecurity, indicating areas that need attention or improvement. I find such interactive guidance valuable."
"The setup was not simple."
"An area for improvement in Citrix Web App and API Protection is for it to give real-time notifications and alerts. It would be practical if the solution warns you if there's an attack or if the load or traffic volume increases or decreases. An additional feature I'd like to see in Citrix Web App and API Protection is a prediction or artificial intelligence on what is happening, for example, attacks."
"The solution's pricing is a big concern and should be improved."
"Security could be improved because then I can get rid of my Cisco firewalls. If they improve the security then I could run my security, my proxy, my firewalling and my SDN solution on one device instead of having to have multiple devices."
"The reporting is not so good. They don't have an application to connect the logs."
"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."
"Its technical support could be better."
"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."
"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."
"The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"NGINX App Protect could improve security."
"They could provide a better user interface."
More Citrix Web App and API Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix Web App and API Protection is ranked 18th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 11 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 13th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 20 reviews. Citrix Web App and API Protection is rated 8.0, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Citrix Web App and API Protection writes "Affordable, provides advanced features, and protects applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". Citrix Web App and API Protection is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door, Fortinet FortiWeb, AWS WAF and Akamai App and API Protector, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Citrix Web App and API Protection 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.