Sukun JainSenior Software Engineer at Varian Medical Systems, Inc.
Anonymous UserProduct Manager - Technical at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The pricing is quite good."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"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."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"The pricing of the solution is a bit high. The solution should offer different pricing systems."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
"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."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"It is not expensive."
"Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."
"The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative."
"Our licensing costs are about $40,000 a year."
Azure Application Gateway is a web traffic load balancer that enables you to manage traffic to your web applications. Traditional load balancers operate at the transport layer (OSI layer 4 - TCP and UDP) and route traffic based on source IP address and port, to a destination IP address and port.
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.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while NGINX Web Application Firewall is ranked 13th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 3 reviews. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.6, while NGINX Web Application Firewall is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "Needs better security and functionality, and requires more intelligence to make it competitive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX Web Application Firewall writes "A stable system with good security and load balancing". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, AWS WAF, F5 BIG-IP and HAProxy, whereas NGINX Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare. See our Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. NGINX Web Application Firewall 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.