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."The solution's integration is very good."
"Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"The pricing is quite good."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"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."
"The policies are flexible based on the technologies you use."
"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."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"The stability of the product is very impressive since it handles 60,000 to 70,000 requests or transactions per second."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"It is a stable solution."
"The working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"Microsoft needs to work on their documentation."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"The solution is easy to use overall, but the dashboard could be updated with a better layout and graphical design so that we can see the data a bit easier. Microsoft could also add more documentation. The documentation Microsoft provides doesn't tell us about resource requirements. We found that the instances we had weren't sufficient to support the firewall, so we had to increase them."
"The product's performance should be better."
"The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team."
"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."
"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."
"They could provide a better user interface."
"NGINX App Protect could improve security."
"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 solution needs to be improved in the e-commerce portal."
"The price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 41 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 15th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 20 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, F5 Advanced WAF, Citrix NetScaler, 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.
