We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and NGINX App Protect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's technical support is excellent."
"It is easy to maintain the solution."
"It employs high availability."
"The setup was straightforward and it took one hour to deploy."
"We find the container orchestration tool that this solution provides to be very valuable."
"The most valuable features of AKS are rollback updates, high availability, easy management, speedy execution and deployment."
"The product has built-in functionality that checks whether the service is available or not. In case the service is down, the tool will create a new instance by default. Hence, the web API will be always up irrespective of the server or the situation."
"AKS is easy to use. We can scale up and down as needed with AKS, which saves us money on our cloud costs."
"It is a very good tool for load balancing."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy."
"WAF is useful to track mitigation, inclusion, prevention, and the parametric firewall."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"It is a stable solution."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"The solution's logs have room for improvement."
"The engineering team can reduce the management of the platform itself by improving the data plane part of the system to upload more management."
"AKS has the potential to enhance pricing by enabling us to explore ways to increase cost transparency. However, it's important to note that this refers to computation costs rather than client costs. Our objective is to optimize efficiency and minimize unnecessary expenses. Therefore, we aim to identify which services within the platform can benefit from improved consumption patterns. This is the focus of our ongoing research, with the goal of maximizing computational power within the cluster. We aim to avoid situations where resources are reserved but not utilized effectively. Additionally, our strong emphasis on security ensures that we adhere to all relevant compliance standards, bolstering our overall trustworthiness."
"I would like to see the stability get more synchronized."
"AKS could enhance its functionality by introducing a blueprint feature that streamlines and expedites the process. With a blueprint, users can leverage pre-defined configurations, including some common survey elements, reducing the need for extensive customization and allowing us to focus on our core business activities. Additionally, if the blueprint covers security aspects, it would be greatly beneficial, as it eliminates the need for us to build security expertise from scratch. Currently, we encounter challenges during cloud onboarding, security implementation, and adapting to Kubernetes. Although Microsoft may not consider these as their direct responsibility, providing a blueprint similar to what they offer to developers would be highly advantageous."
"There are a lot of features that should be included with the AKS."
"Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is not up to optimal standards when it comes to capturing logs and visualization."
"Configuration management and troubleshooting performance issues are difficult to solve and could be made easier."
"As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment."
"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."
"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 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."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"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."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 20th in Container Security with 19 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher, Qualys VMDR and Tenable.io Container Security, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. NGINX App Protect report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.
