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."Citrix Web App API Protection allows you to enable a blocking mode"
"We have good customer support."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The work balancing applications are the most valuable feature."
"The web application firewall which protects our services on the internet, and then of course services like our ability to provide high availability for the services we are offering are the most valuable features."
"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."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source."
"We were looking for a product that is capable of complete automation and a container based solution. It's working."
"It has the best documentation features."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"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 product could be improved by making it easier to use and easier to implement."
"The user interface could be more friendly. Some wizards and other documentation for administrators, as well as some use cases, helps us to understand the solution."
"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."
"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."
"Citrix Web App and API Protection could improve in the area of licensing"
"The configuration for its web application firewall is complicated."
"The setup of NGINX App Protect is complex. The full process took one week to complete. Additionally, we had to change the network infrastructure platform which took one month."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"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."
"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."
"NGINX App Protect could improve security."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
More Citrix Web App and API Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix Web App and API Protection is ranked 20th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 19 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 "Has a good graphic user interface for beginners, but lacks real-time notifications, alerts, and artificial intelligence". 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 AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Noname Security. 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.
