We performed a comparison between Imperva Web Application Firewall 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 is very scalable. It is one of the most important features. You can also expand resources and features as well."
"The tool's profiling feature maps all the web application directories and related components on the profile directory. It has improved the security of my client's website applications."
"Data masking is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"It has threat intelligence and we are using Incapsula. With threat intelligence, we can separate HTTP and HTTPS traffic. We can use Incapsula to send all the threat intelligence to the WAF."
"I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"Imperva has a complete picture of how the applications are utilizing it. It is handy. DDoS is good. It has an internally managed database. It is very easy to integrate. We have integrated it with SIEM services."
"The solution integrates seamlessly with other tools and has a good alert mechanism."
"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"It is a very good tool for load balancing."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"It is a stable solution."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"The policies are flexible based on the technologies you use."
"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."
"I would like the solution to improve its support response time."
"An improvement for Imperva WAF would be to reduce the number of false positives and create more strong use cases based on AI/ML or behavioral analytics."
"The reporting is missing some features, such as: only two export formats, and the time period does not include the last day, week, year."
"Sometimes, support tickets don't get addressed quickly."
"I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution."
"I loved the approach of the cloud. The cloud has a lot of new features, like advanced web protection and DDoS protection. If those could also be on-boarded onto the on-prem versions, that would be ideal. They need to pay attention to both deployment options and not just favor one."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"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."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
"They could provide a better user interface."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment."
"The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 47 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 13th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 20 reviews. Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and F5 Advanced WAF. See our Imperva Web Application Firewall 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.