Compare NGINX Web Application Firewall vs. R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll)

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Use NGINX Web Application Firewall? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Amazon, Fortinet and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2020.
442,517 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 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."

More NGINX Web Application Firewall Pros »

"The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis."

More R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) Pros »

Cons
"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."

More NGINX Web Application Firewall Cons »

"The area that should be improved is licensing."

More R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative."

More NGINX Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
442,517 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: 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.
Top Answer: The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative. The only alternative is Imperva, but that is even more expensive.
Top Answer: This firewall should support more of the network layers. Profiling capability should be improved. Setting policies and parameters through the UI should be more automated because the process is manual… more »
Top Answer: Imperva is a strong choice, given their security focus and ongoing R&D into the product in areas such as bot management.
Top Answer: The three most valuable features that I noticed are the geo-localization of the user, the IP reputation, and the compartmental analysis.
Top Answer: The area that should be improved is licensing. When using an active/passive cluster, we have to pay 70% of the master appliance and license for the passive server that does not work. Since we know… more »
Ranking
Views
1,884
Comparisons
1,533
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
467
Avg. Rating
8.0
Views
285
Comparisons
222
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
479
Avg. Rating
9.0
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
NGINX WAFRohde & Schwarz Web Application Firewall, R&S WAF, DenyAll Web Application Security
Learn
F5
Rohde & Schwarz
Overview

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.

Beyond the basic capabilities of traditional negative and positive security models, DenyAll’s scoring mechanism, user behavior tracking and advanced detection engines deliver best-of-breed security that won’t let you down. None of our customers have made the headlines with security breaches.

Web Services and automated machine-to-machine communications support business processes, internal and with ecosystem partners that are often critical. DenyAll makes it easy to optimize and secure these XML-based data flows, with capabilities found in no other WAF or SOA Gateway.

Offer
Learn more about NGINX Web Application Firewall
Learn more about R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll)
Sample Customers
m.a.x IT
Information Not Available
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company34%
Comms Service Provider17%
Media Company15%
Financial Services Firm9%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Amazon, Fortinet and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2020.
442,517 professionals have used our research since 2012.
NGINX Web Application Firewall is ranked 13th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 2 reviews while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review. NGINX Web Application Firewall is rated 8.0, while R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of NGINX Web Application Firewall writes "A stable system with good security and load balancing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) writes "Geo-localization and IP reputation help to keep our clients secure and more available". NGINX Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF and Airlock, whereas R&S Web Application Firewall (DenyAll) is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, Fortinet FortiWeb and PerimeterX Bot Defender.

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.