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

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs NGINX App Protect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Azure Application...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
2nd
Average Rating
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (3rd)
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 Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is 10.5%, down from 13.7% 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

Sami - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 29, 2022
High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure
Our company uses the solution to publish services that are on Azure. There is more than one way to publish services.  You can use the Microsoft infrastructure for app services including small programming, configurations related to obligations, and publishing. Or you can publish manually by using…
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

"The load balancing features are valuable."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"The solution's integration is very good."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"The tool is easy to use and quite flexible. It has policy management features as well. The solution screens all traffic to our web applications before passing it to the application. We recently tested it on one of our poorly developed applications, and the upgrade gave us a 100% result based on our tests. It's very effective as a security measure, and people can detect threats even through the web application."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"It has the best documentation features."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"It is a stable solution."
"The tool is not complex and is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source."
"I tested specific features and evaluated the solution against the Web Application Firewall. I conducted research to test different detection percentages. I did not use it directly for protection but for evaluation purposes."
"The stability of the product is very impressive since it handles 60,000 to 70,000 requests or transactions per second."
 

Cons

"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"It is a bit tricky to configure. You've got to have a very specific format to configure it. They should make it a little bit easier to configure. Mapping the certificates into it isn't easy, and it could be better. Currently, you've to write a bit of automation to pull certificates directly to HTTPS."
"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"We have encountered some issues with automatic redirection and cancellation, leading to 502 and 504 gateway errors. So, I experienced some trouble with containers."
"The solution can sometimes feel a little cumbersome unless you're a professional infrastructure person."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
"It takes a lot of time for a certificate to update in the system. That is a huge drawback, affecting the load-balancing side. And when there are changes to the load balancing, it affects the end-user."
"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."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
"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 product's price is high, making it an area of concern where improvements are required. The tool's licensing model is also not good."
"As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Between v1 and v2, there is a lot of change in the pricing. It is very costly compared to AWS."
"I rate the pricing seven out of ten because some third-party solutions are even costlier than this."
"I rate the price of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway an eight out of ten."
"The solution is reasonably priced compared to other solutions."
"Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."
"The solution is paid monthly. The solution is highly expensive."
"Regarding pricing for Azure Application Gateway, I would rate it at seven."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has less price than other application gateway solutions."
"There is a license needed to use NGINX App Protect."
"NGINX App Protect is expensive."
"Our licensing costs are about $40,000 a year."
"There is a monthly or annual subscription to use NGINX App Protect. There are not any additional costs to the subscription."
"Really understand the licensing model, because we underestimated that."
"The price of NGINX App Protect is approximately $3,000 annually. All of our licenses are observed by a managed service partner."
"The pricing is reasonable because NGINX operates on an instance basis."
"The price of NGINX App Protect is not much different from the products that fall under the leader category of Gartner Magic Quadrant."
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
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
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's the difference between Azure Front Door and Application Gateway?
We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the...
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 Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Application Gateway automatically redirects unwanted users and takes care of the security aspect. It also handles the performance side of things, which is why we use it.
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

Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
NGINX WAF, NGINX Web Application Firewall
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs. NGINX App Protect and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.