We performed a comparison between AWS WAF 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 most valuable aspect is that it protects our code. It's a bit difficult to overwrite code in our application. It also protects against threats."
"We can host any DB or application on the solution."
"The product's initial setup phase was very simple."
"The security firewall plus the features that protect against database injections or scripting,"
"The interface is good."
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"AWS WAF has a lot of integrated features and services. For example, there are security services that can be integrated very well for our customers."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the ability to integrate central sets. It protects from intrusion attacks such as scripting and SQL injections."
"The policies are flexible based on the technologies you use."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"The stability of the product is very impressive since it handles 60,000 to 70,000 requests or transactions per second."
"It has the best documentation features."
"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."
"It is a very good tool for load balancing."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"They should work to define more threats, add more security, and make it more compliant with more security companies."
"AWS WAF would be better if it uses AI or machine learning to detect a potential attack or a potential IP that creates an attack even before it happens. I want AWS WAF to capture the IP and automatically write the rule to automate the entire process."
"It would be good if the solution provided managed WAF services."
"It's a bit difficult to apply the right rules for the right security."
"While the complexity of the installation can vary from one service to another, overall, I would say that it and the configuration and navigation are somewhat complex."
"The default content policy available in the tool is not very strong compared to the competitors."
"For uniformity, AWS has a well-accepted framework. However, it'll be better for us if we could have some more documented guidelines on how the specific business should be structured and the roles that the cloud recommends."
"The serverless product from AWS WAF could be improved. For example, they have only one serverless series, Lambda, but they should extend and improve it. Additionally, the firewall rules are not very easy to configure."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"NGINX App Protect could improve security."
"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."
"As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect 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."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 19 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Radware Cloud WAF Service, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Noname Security. See our AWS WAF 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.