We performed a comparison between Azure Web Application Firewall 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."The solution has good dashboards."
"It's quite a stable product and works well with Microsoft products."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn. It's cloud-based, so you don't need to buy or maintain any hardware infrastructure."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"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."
"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."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"It is a very good tool for load balancing."
"The stability of the product is very impressive since it handles 60,000 to 70,000 requests or transactions per second."
"The management can be improved."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic."
"In Brazil, we have some problems with the phone service that affect our connection with the cloud. However, it isn't common."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"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."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"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."
"They could provide a better user interface."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"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."
More Azure Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Web Application Firewall is ranked 12th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 9 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 20 reviews. Azure Web Application Firewall is rated 8.4, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Web Application Firewall writes "It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". Azure Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door, Azure Firewall and F5 Advanced WAF, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF and 42Crunch API Security Platform. See our Azure Web Application Firewall 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.
