NGINX App Protect Reviews

Mail Proxy Server and SMTP are quite effective features in the product. The tool's API connectivity across the hybrid network is pretty impressive, which is almost the same as the threat intelligence capabilities of NGINX.

The product's price is high, making it an area of concern where improvements are required. The tool's licensing model is also not good.

The product should have more documentation, especially like the ones provided by other OEMs.

I have been using NGINX App Protect for five years. I use NGINX App Protect WAF Release 5.0. My company has a partnership with F5.

My company is currently dealing with one enterprise-sized company and one financial organization.

The product's initial setup phase was a bit difficult since the articles and other documentation were not that good.

When it comes to the implementation part, at least seven days are needed for the testing phase since there may be some struggles in several places, and one may have to go directly to the OEM just to make sure that we can study the tool properly.

The product's price is high.

If NGINX App Protect does not fit the budget of our customers, then my company recommends Radware to such clients. Radware's OEM engagement is better than that of NGINX App Protect.

I don't have any problem with NGINX App Protect's OEM engagement. When I directly engage with the tool's OEM, I see that they are really helpful. When it comes to OEM, F5 has an amazing feature set and is pretty technical. Technicians from F5 can help any time with any request of a client associated with the tool, and they also help to help clients so our company's deals with them can mature further.

The product is good since NGINX is involved in a lot of research and development work. Two years ago, my company used the firewall from NGINX. In the previous year, my company entered into a deal with Radware.

Whether I would recommend the product to others depends on their requirements and the type of business they are doing, among other factors.

Speaking about how the tool has been able to handle new and emerging security threats, I would say that my company is testing the product to see if it fits our requirements. My company is testing some threats.

My company has not tested the product with any of the tool's AI-driven security initiatives, but we may do so later since we are only working on one deal associated with Radware.

The tool is not complex and is very user-friendly.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

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.

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. In the next release, I'd like to see some enhancements in bot protection, API security, and mobile application security.

I've been using NGINX App Protect for four years.

NGINX App Protect is stable but has some areas for improvement, including HTML5 availability. I would rate its stability eight out of ten.

NGINX's technical support is good, but sometimes their response time is delayed, or they don't have the technical skills to resolve issues. We're seeing these issues despite having premium support.

Positive

I previously used Imperva WAF.

I would give NGINX App Protect a rating of eight out of ten.

NGINX App Protect has improved the flexibility of services in our company and distributed new escalation applications. The downtime in our network has decreased substantially. In a short time, we can republish and resolve issues in our network.

The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility.

I have been using NGINX App Protect for approximately three years.

NGINX App Protect is stable.

The scalability of NGINX App Protect is decent.

We have approximately 500 people using the solution in my organization. We have IT specialists that work with the core mobile network.

We do not have technical support in Iran, we only use our own knowledge about the solution.

I did not use a similar solution previous to NGINX App Protect.

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.

I rate the setup difficulty of NGINX App Protect a four out of five.

We used an IT expert for the implementation of NGINX App Protect. We have three people who provide support for NGINX App Protect.

We have received a return on investment, NGINX App Protect was a good investment.

I rate the price of NGINX App Protect a three out of five.

There are not any additional costs we had to pay to use NGINX App Protect.

We have a complex project and we found some of our applications did not work as intended. However, moving forward we do not find we will experience this level of complexity.

I rate NGINX App Protect a nine out of ten.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that IVF and ICSI are covered under the firewall option offered by the tool. I don't have a specific feature I like the most since I look at features through comparisons of different firewall products and the features of such tools.

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. The main menu can be quite confusing.

After you implement it, it's not so easy to understand how it works. Though in my company, we understand the basics of the product, if you want to explore the more advanced features, then the principal product doesn't explain it to us, which can be quite confusing when navigating through the main menu.

I have been using NGINX App Protect for five years. I use the solution in my company.

It is a stable solution.

In our company, we never tried to use the scalability options provided by the tool.

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support an eight to nine out of ten.

Positive

Previously, our company was using Fortinet. I don't know why my company switched from Fortinet to NGINX App Protect because it happened before I joined the organization.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

The price of NGINX App Protect is not much different from the products that fall under the leader category of Gartner Magic Quadrant.

My company needs to expand its options to see if some other brand apart from NGINX App Protect is faster.

As the license for NGINX App Protect in our company will expire in a few months, my company wants to make a decision on whether to extend the services of the tool or not based on the research we do on other platforms in the market.

My company is satisfied with the product.

For the user interface, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

For the functionalities of the product, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

We use the solution for application firewall purposes. We use both mobile and web applications.

During the NGINX App Protect v1.1 upgrade, we encountered compatibility issues with our existing telecom infrastructure, specifically the load balancer and WAF. These issues manifested as difficulties with the HTTP 1.1 protocol. While attempting to solve the problem through upgrades, we ultimately opted for alternative solutions as the desired effect could not be achieved. This highlights the technical challenges of integrating NGINX App Protect with diverse network components.

I have been using NGINX App Protect for more than five years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight-point five out of ten.

The solution is scalable.

The customer service’s response should be faster.

The initial setup is straightforward. For deployment, we configured basic configuration, and after mounting, We observed our application for almost four months. After that, we proceed to enforcement blocking mode. Typically, all our applications are live, so we can't block it on day one. We observed it for a long time, like six months, and then we went into step-by-step blocking mode.

Three people are required for the solution's deployment.

The product is expensive and has a subscription-based licence.

NGINX App Protect's high price and limited support options can be a drawback. While troubleshooting basic issues is manageable, resolving advanced problems through paid support channels can be expensive and experience delays.

I recommend the solution if the client has no financial issues regarding their WAF or LTM solutions. Still, if they are budget constraints, one should think of other options like Fortinet.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We are using NGINX App Protect as a web portal and we are planning to use it as an API gateway.

The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its open source.

NGINX App Protect could improve security.

I have been using NGINX App Protect for approximately five years.

NGINX App Protect is stable.

The scalability of NGINX App Protect is good.

Everyone in my company that uses this solution are developers. We have a total of 150 concurrent users.

The support from NGINX App Protect is too expensive. We did not end up receiving support because of the cost.

The initial setup of NGINX App Protect is easy. It took us a couple of days maximum.

NGINX App Protect is low maintenance and we did the implementation in-house with a couple of people.

We have seen a return on investment using NGINX App Protect.

The price of NGINX App Protect is approximately $3,000 annually. All of our licenses are observed by a managed service partner.

I rate NGINX App Protect an eight out of ten.

No solution is perfect, there is always room for improvement.

NGINX App Protect can be used as a reverse proxy, internet controller, and for caching.

NGINX App Protect has improved our organization by using the load balancer feature.

The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy.

The price of NGINX App Protect could improve.

I have been using NGINX App Protect for approximately two years.

NGINX App Protect is stable. It is lightweight and fast.

The scalability of NGINX App Protect is good and it is easy to do.

The experience I had with the technical support was good.

We used another solution previously to NGINX App Protect. We switch to testing other solutions.

The initial setup of NGINX App Protect is basic. The full deployment took approximately one day.

We followed the documentation to do the implementation of NGINX App Protect in-house. We have one person that does the deployment and maintenance of the solution.

I have not seen a return on investment, it is too soon. We are only in the testing phase.

There is a monthly or annual subscription to use NGINX App Protect. There are not any additional costs to the subscription.

I rate the price of NGINX App Protect a three out of five.

I would recommend this solution to others because it performs well.

I rate NGINX App Protect a ten out of ten.

I work with containers. I do the architecting, but there are times when I also do the implementation. So I'm familiar with the products, particularly NGINX.

NGINX App Protect is used in Kubernetes and OpenShift environments.

NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session. I can experiment with whatever I want. I can start with URLs and cookies. I can work with parameters and everything that I need. I can work with signatures also. I can inspect the traffic whenever I want.

As I see it now, there are some things to improve, but the F5's WAF is, more enhanced when compared to NGINX's. However, they have done a good job adapting it.

It should be automated in some way. 

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 would be good if some kind of automation was included.

I have worked with NGINX App Protect for at least three or four years.

NGINX App Protect is a stable product. Because it's an additional module, we use it in conjunction with the Ingress Controller, but it can also be run anywhere, as a VM or whatever you need. 

They did an excellent job porting the VSM code to NGINX.

NGINX App Protect is scalable, but, handling the configuration is still time-consuming. It doesn't have a centralized option. They have the NGINX controller and some APIs to do it, but it isn't fully scalable in my opinion.

I've known them for a long time because I began working with F5 more than ten years ago. Even though my primary experience is with F5, and I don't have many tickets open in NGINX in general, the service is quick. But, in my opinion, it's pretty solid.

I began with F5 products such as ASM. It performs the functions of the various firewalls. When NGINX was acquired by F5, they adapted the module for NGINX, which was dubbed App Protect. When this became public, I began to work with NGINX in this case as well.

The implementation process is not simple. If you have more than one, the policy must be created from scratch in YAML files, which is not automated and takes time.

The pricing is reasonable because NGINX operates on an instance basis. There are differences. There is some leeway in how much the instance can cost, depending on the customer and other actions, but it's reasonable in my opinion.

I work as a consultant for a company and am currently evaluating some products.

We are a partner with F5. I am currently evaluating Prisma Cloud because they have a WAF option on Palo Alto and I'm looking into it. But, aside from Prisma, I've never seen the WAF. So I'm attempting to make some comparisons in order to learn the Prisma side and see how it works with NGINX. I downloaded a document to get a head start on it and to form an idea for now.

I would rate NGINX App Protect a seven out of ten.