Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS WAF vs NGINX App Protect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NGINX App Protect
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (21st), API Security (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of AWS WAF is 13.7%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NGINX App Protect is 2.2%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Rohit Kesharwani - PeerSpot reviewer
Jan 24, 2024
A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks
We use AWS WAF to protect our application from different kinds of attacks. We use AWS WAF for retail customers Our retail application is vulnerable to a lot of bot attacks. AWS WAF helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection that happen within the retail industry. The…
Tomaz Sobczak - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 25, 2024
Signature-based detection, DOS protection, and bot protection
NGINX App Protect is easier to automate and configure, or manage from an API. This is good for securing applications. However, it's not suitable for more complex tasks. NGINX App Protect positively impacted performance changes. There's a cache or it works like a proxy, so it can speed up…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"They filter a lot of attacks out."
"The tool’s stability is very good."
"AWS WAF helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection that happen within the retail industry."
"One common use case is using detection protection for enhancing security models in AWS. Another use case is implementing log analysis and response recovery procedures for email services."
"The simple configuration and the scalability have been most valuable. We are able to scale across all of our different AWS instances."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the way it blocks threats to external applications."
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"We were looking for a product that is capable of complete automation and a container based solution. It's working."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"The policies are flexible based on the technologies you use."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"It is a stable solution."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
 

Cons

"The product must provide more features."
"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."
"There is a lot of innovation talk, however, implementation might be lacking."
"The default content policy available in the tool is not very strong compared to the competitors."
"We should be able to do proper whitelisting."
"The price could be improved."
"This solution could be improved if the configuration steps were more specific to WAF, compared to other cloud services."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"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 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."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"NGINX App Protect could improve security."
"The price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"It doesn't have more advanced features like no false-positive security, which you can configure in Advanced WAF."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's cost depends on the use cases."
"There are different scale options available for WAF."
"AWS WAF has reasonable pricing."
"Its price is fair. There is a very fair amount that they charge. It has a pay-as-you-go model, so it pretty much depends on how much a user uses it. As per the cloud norms, the more you use, the more you pay. I would rate it a five out of ten in terms of pricing."
"It's quite affordable. It's in the middle."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"For Kubernetes microservices, AWS is more expensive compared to OCI. AWS costs approximately 70 cents per hour, while OCI is 50% cheaper."
"AWS WAF is pay-as-you-go, I only pay for what I'm using. There is no subscription or any payment upfront, I can terminate use at any time. Which is an advantage."
"There are no additional fees."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
"There is a license needed to use NGINX App Protect."
"Our licensing costs are about $40,000 a year."
"The price of NGINX App Protect is not much different from the products that fall under the leader category of Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"The price of NGINX App Protect is approximately $3,000 annually. All of our licenses are observed by a managed service partner."
"The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative."
"The pricing is reasonable because NGINX operates on an instance basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
5%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What are the limitations of AWS WAF vs alternative WAFs?
Hi Varun, I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF is t...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What do you like most about AWS WAF?
The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is its highly configurable rules system.
What needs improvement with NGINX App Protect?
The product's price is high, making it an area of concern where improvements are required. The tool's licensing model is also not good. The product should have more documentation, especially like t...
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
NGINX WAF, NGINX Web Application Firewall
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. NGINX App Protect and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.