Compare AWS WAF vs. NGINX Web Application Firewall

AWS WAF is ranked 9th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 9 reviews while NGINX Web Application Firewall is ranked 17th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 3 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 7.6, while NGINX Web Application Firewall is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "Makes sure files are protected, but the solution should be more proactive in detecting threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX Web Application Firewall writes "A stable system with good security and load balancing". AWS WAF is most compared with Imperva Incapsula, Akamai Kona Site Defender and F5 BIG-IP, whereas NGINX Web Application Firewall is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF and Fortinet FortiWeb.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Cloudflare, Imperva and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: February 2020.
399,230 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The most valuable feature is the scalability because it automatically scales up or scales down as per our requirements.The security firewall plus the features that protect against database injections or scripting,The ability to take multiple data sets and match those data sets together is the solution's most valuable feature. The data lake that comes with it is very useful because that allows us to match data sets with different configurations that we wouldn't normally be able to match.The initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment took about ten minutes or less.The customized billing is the most valuable feature.It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed.It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need.It's simple, easy to use.

Read more »

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 is that I can establish different services from the firewall.It is a very good tool for load balancing.

Read more »

Cons
I would like to be able to view a graphical deployment map in the user interface that will give me an overview of the configuration and help to determine whether I have missed any steps.For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad botsThe solution is cloud-based, and therefore the billing model that comes with it could be more intuitive, in my opinion. It's very easy to not fully understand how you tag things for billing and then you can quite easily run up a high bill without realizing it. The solution needs to be more intuitive around the tagging system, which enables the billing. Right now, I have a cloud architect that does that on our behalf and it isn't something that a business user could use because it still requires quite a lot of technical knowledge to do effectively.They should work to define more threats, add more security, and make it more compliant with more security companies.In a future release of this solution, I would like to see additional management features to make things simpler.We need more support as we go global.The user experience, the interface, is lacking. Sometimes it's hard to find certain areas that it has alerted on.In a future release I would like to see automation. There's no interaction between the applications and that makes it tedious. We have to do the preparation all over again for each of our other applications.

Read more »

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.The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
There are different scale options available for WAF.There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.It's an annual subscription.

Read more »

The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
399,230 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
3,780
Comparisons
3,041
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
385
Avg. Rating
7.8
Views
999
Comparisons
804
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
519
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Also Known As
AWS Web Application FirewallNGINX WAF
Learn
Amazon
Video Not Available
F5
Video Not Available
Overview

AWS WAF is a web application firewall that helps protect your web applications from common web exploits that could affect application availability, compromise security, or consume excessive resources. AWS WAF gives you control over which traffic to allow or block to your web applications by defining customizable web security rules. You can use AWS WAF to create custom rules that block common attack patterns, such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting, and rules that are designed for your specific application. New rules can be deployed within minutes, letting you respond quickly to changing traffic patterns. Also, AWS WAF includes a full-featured API that you can use to automate the creation, deployment, and maintenance of web security rules.

Even when you understand security, it is difficult to create secure applications, especially when working under the pressures so common in today’s enterprise. The NGINX Web Application Firewall (WAF) protects applications against sophisticated Layer 7 attacks that might otherwise lead to systems being taken over by attackers, loss of sensitive data, and downtime. The NGINX WAF is based on the widely used ModSecurity open source software.

Offer
Learn more about AWS WAF
Learn more about NGINX Web Application Firewall
Sample Customers
eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao Internationalm.a.x IT
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company36%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company14%
Retailer8%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Cloudflare, Imperva and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: February 2020.
399,230 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.