We performed a comparison between NGINX App Protect and SUSE NeuVector 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."We were looking for a product that is capable of complete automation and a container based solution. It's working."
"The stability of the product is very impressive since it handles 60,000 to 70,000 requests or transactions per second."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy."
"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 is a very good tool for load balancing."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections."
"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."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary."
"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."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
NGINX App Protect is ranked 21st in Container Security with 19 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 19th in Container Security with 7 reviews. NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". NGINX App Protect is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Sysdig Falco and Trivy. See our NGINX App Protect vs. SUSE NeuVector 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.