We performed a comparison between NGINX App Protect and SonicWall Web Application Firewall 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 stability of the product is very impressive since it handles 60,000 to 70,000 requests or transactions per second."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"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's very easy to deploy."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"The solution offers better data protection than competitors."
"We use SonicWall Web Application Firewall for security and tunneling."
"Capture ATP is a good additional feature in the latest version."
"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."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
"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 price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment."
"We have a lot of unknown errors popping up in the latest version."
"We should get the logs from the solution, and it should communicate with the local DNS."
"The solution needs an access management feature with API integration so we can assign certain levels of access within groups."
More SonicWall Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
NGINX App Protect is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 19 reviews while SonicWall Web Application Firewall is ranked 25th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 3 reviews. NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2, while SonicWall Web Application Firewall is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall Web Application Firewall writes "A stable and durable solution that can be used for security and tunneling". NGINX App Protect is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Noname Security, whereas SonicWall Web Application Firewall is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our NGINX App Protect vs. SonicWall 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.
