We performed a comparison between NGINX App Protect and SUSE NeuVector based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."PingSafe can integrate all your cloud accounts and resources you create in the AWS account, We have set it up to scan the AWS transfer services, EC2, security groups, and GitHub."
"The offensive security where they do a fix is valuable. They go to a misconfiguration and provide detailed alerts on what could be there. They also provide a remediation feature where if we give the permission, they can also go and fix the issue."
"The multi-cloud support is valuable. They are expanding to different clouds. It is not restricted to only AWS. It allows us to have different clouds on one platform."
"PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"Cloud Native Security offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its storyline, which helps trace an event back to its source, like an email or someone clicking on a link."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"It has the best documentation features."
"It is a stable solution."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the OWASP certification. Additionally, the tool's ability to enforce strong passwords and OTP within minutes is impressive. With its analytics and recommendations, it is a very good solution."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"There's an array of upcoming versions with numerous features to be incorporated into the roadmap. Customers particularly appreciate the service's emphasis on intensive security, especially the secret scanning aspect. During the proof of concept (POC) phase, the system is required to gather logs from the customer's environment. This process entails obtaining specific permissions, especially in terms of gateway access. While most permissions for POC are manageable, the need for various permissions may need improvement, especially in the context of security."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"For vulnerabilities, they are showing CVE ID. The naming convention should be better so that it indicates the container where a vulnerability is present. Currently, they are only showing CVE ID, but the same CVE ID might be present in multiple containers. We would like to have the container name so that we can easily fix the issue."
"Cloud Native Security's reporting could be better. We are unable to see which images are impacted. Several thousand images have been deployed, so if we can see some application-specific information in the dashboard, we can directly send that report to the team that owns the application. We'd also like the option to download the report from the portal instead of waiting for the report to be sent to our email."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"Maybe container runtime security could be improved."
"I used to work on AWS. At times, I would generate a normal bug in my system, and then I would check PingSafe. The alert used to come after about three and a half hours. It used to take that long to generate the alert about the vulnerability in my system. If a hacker attacks a system and PingSafe takes three to four hours to generate an alert, it will not be beneficial for the company. It would be helpful if we get the alert in five to ten minutes."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment."
"The solution needs to be improved in the e-commerce portal."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections."
"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."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
NGINX App Protect is ranked 20th in Container Security with 20 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 19th in Container Security with 7 reviews. NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". NGINX App Protect is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare, whereas SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Sysdig Falco, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Tenable.io Container Security. See our NGINX App Protect vs. SUSE NeuVector report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.