We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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."I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"The pricing is quite good."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities."
"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."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"It is a very good tool for load balancing."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
"Currently, the policies have to be handled manually, and you have to create from scratch, which can be a bit time-consuming, in a large environment."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
"The price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"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."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"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."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 19 reviews. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Amazon Elastic Load Balancing, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Noname Security. See our Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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.