NGINX App Protect vs Noname Security comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
F5 Logo
442 views|319 comparisons
94% willing to recommend
Noname Security Logo
1,990 views|1,498 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between NGINX App Protect and Noname Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Noname Security, Salt Security, F5 and others in API Security.
To learn more, read our detailed API Security Report (Updated: April 2024).
768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"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.""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.""It is a very good tool for load balancing.""It's very easy to deploy.""The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility.""The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source.""The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall.""The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."

More NGINX App Protect Pros →

"The most valuable feature of this solution is its integration with API gateways, WAP and with part of their SDLC."

More Noname Security Pros →

Cons
"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.""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.""As far as scalability, it takes a long time for deployment.""The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary.""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.""The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections.""They could provide a better user interface."

More NGINX App Protect Cons →

"I think it would be good if they can integrate more with API gateways as this is currently limited."

More Noname Security Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative."
  • "Our licensing costs are about $40,000 a year."
  • "Really understand the licensing model, because we underestimated that."
  • "There are no additional fees."
  • "NGINX is not expensive."
  • "The pricing is reasonable because NGINX operates on an instance basis."
  • "There is a license needed to use NGINX App Protect."
  • "There are not any additional costs we had to pay to use NGINX App Protect."
  • More NGINX App Protect Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Security solutions are best for your needs.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The solution has yearly, three-year, and five-year subscriptions.
    Top Answer:NGINX App Protect could provide a better user interface.
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature of this solution is its integration with API gateways, WAP and with part of their SDLC.
    Top Answer:I think it would be good if they can integrate more with API gateways as this is currently limited.
    Top Answer:I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
    Ranking
    3rd
    out of 21 in API Security
    Views
    442
    Comparisons
    319
    Reviews
    9
    Average Words per Review
    334
    Rating
    8.7
    1st
    out of 21 in API Security
    Views
    1,990
    Comparisons
    1,498
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    197
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    NGINX WAF, NGINX Web Application Firewall
    Noname Platform
    Learn More
    Noname Security
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    NGINX App Protect application security solution combines the efficacy of advanced F5 web application firewall (WAF) technology with the agility and performance of NGINX Plus. The solution runs natively on NGINX Plus and addresses some of the most difficult challenges facing modern DevOps environments:

    • Integrating security controls directly into the development automation pipeline
    • Applying and managing security for modern and distributed application environments such as containers and microservices
    • Providing the right level of security controls without impacting release and go-to-market velocity
    • Complying with security and regulatory requirements

    NGINX App Protect offers:

    • Expanded security beyond basic signatures to ensure adequate controls
    • F5 app‑security technology for efficacy superior to ModSecurity and other WAFs
    • Confidently run in “blocking” mode in production with proven F5 expertise
    • High‑confidence signatures for extremely low false positives
    • Increases visibility, integrating with third‑party analytics solutions
    • Integrates security and WAF natively into the CI/CD pipeline
    • Deploys as a lightweight software package that is agnostic of underlying infrastructure
    • Facilitates declarative policies for “security as code” and integration with DevOps tools
    • Decreases developer burden and provides feedback loop for quick security remediation
    • Accelerates time to market and reduces costs with DevSecOps‑automated security

    The Holistic API Security Solution
    Protect your APIs from data leakage, authorization issues, abuse, misuse and data corruption with no agents and no network modifications.

    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm33%
    Comms Service Provider33%
    Insurance Company17%
    Computer Software Company17%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm23%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Retailer7%
    Healthcare Company7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business26%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise47%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise74%
    Buyer's Guide
    API Security
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Noname Security, Salt Security, F5 and others in API Security. Updated: April 2024.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    NGINX App Protect is ranked 3rd in API Security with 19 reviews while Noname Security is ranked 1st in API Security with 1 review. NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2, while Noname Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Noname Security writes "Security platform that offers value through its integration with API gateways". NGINX App Protect is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas Noname Security is most compared with Salt Security, Traceable AI, Akamai API Security, Cequence Security and Wallarm NG WAF.

    See our list of best API Security vendors.

    We monitor all API 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.