NGINX Plus with NGINX App Protect Premium - RHEL 8

My main use case for NGINX App Protect  is primarily in our infrastructure layer with Kubernetes , as I am using it to protect my application from attacks like DDoS and provide additional firewall protection to my application.

A specific example of how NGINX App Protect  helped defend my application was during an attempted DDoS attack, when it flagged those requests and protected one of my applications.

The best features NGINX App Protect offers include a firewall, seven layers of DDoS protection, additional API securities, and threat intelligence services.

Of the features I mentioned, I find myself relying the most on Layer 7 DDoS protection because it protected one of my applications during a DDoS attack, and that has been quite helpful.

NGINX App Protect has positively impacted my organization by adding an additional layer of security on top of my infrastructure layer, which I consider quite helpful.

I think NGINX App Protect could be improved by having it come out of the box with NGINX .

I have been using NGINX App Protect for deployments in servers for more than two to three years.

NGINX App Protect is stable in my experience.

The scalability of NGINX App Protect is good and open source at its best, and I would rate it an 8 or 9 out of 10.

The customer support for NGINX App Protect is good.

I would rate the customer support a 9 on a scale of 1 to 10.

I cannot answer regarding whether I previously used a different solution before NGINX App Protect.

I cannot give a quantifiable metric at the moment regarding return on investment from using NGINX App Protect, but it did help with our compliance.

I will not be able to answer about my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for NGINX App Protect, as something different handles that in my team.

I could not recall the name of the other options, but I did an evaluation between others before choosing NGINX App Protect.

I would rate this product an 8 overall.

I'm following on a project in an initial phase and was looking for products for networking and security. I used  NGINX  App Protect, as a proxy, for the website. I have also implemented a simple web application firewall using NGINX  and naxsi years ago. I have never used other solutions with NGINX App Protect apart from the proxy and the web application firewall features.
From my hands-on experience, NGINX App Protect is mainly useful when you want solid app and API security without changing how you already use NGINX . I’ve used it to protect web applications and APIs from the usual OWASP Top 10 issues, and what stands out is that it runs close to the app, so performance stays predictable and there’s no extra hop in the traffic flow. It works really well in Kubernetes  and microservices environments, where you can apply security at the ingress or even per service and manage policies as code in the same CI/CD pipelines used by the dev teams. I’ve also seen it being effective against Layer-7 DDoS and abusive traffic, especially for APIs, because it learns normal behavior and reduces false positives.

Overall, it feels less like a traditional external WAF  and more like a native extension of NGINX that fits naturally into day-to-day operations

NGINX App Protect is a good product. I have used both versions from F5 -also the free version- (I mean the NGINX/NGINX One/App Protect free trial period), and I think it is a good product. It's stable, affordable, and easy to manage. NGINX App Protect is a comprehensive security solution that combines advanced WAF , DoS protection, API security, and DevSecOps  automation in a lightweight, scalable package ideal for modern cloud-native architectures.

The adaptive machine learning capabilities are truly commendable, as the solution can establish traffic baselines and detect anomalies in real time. It automatically adjusts security policies, minimizing the need for manual intervention and reducing false positives. Additionally, it supports scalable deployment across diverse environments, including on-premises, cloud, Kubernetes , and containers, offering both flexibility and scalability

I have experience with the web server, F5 load balancer, and similar products provided by Ergon, for eg. the web application firewall and the Microgateway for K8S. I'm also familiar with F5 BIG-IP  products.

The GUI and web GUI configuration could be improved to be easier to manage and use.

I have been using this for more or less 20 years.

NGINX App Protect is a good product and performs very well even when it is under stress.

It was not so hard. NGINX App Protect is pretty easy to manage and configure overall.

Only a consultant was involved. I'm working for Adesso Schweiz, a German company that has a business unit in Ticino, Switzerland.

It's not among the cheapest solutions but the expense is justified given the robustness it offers. My priority isn't cost optimization, but the preservation of future capabilities.

I've never used any other solutions and I'm not aware of any alternatives that are as intensive as this one.

I have created a web application firewall. I created it a couple of years ago. The timeframe for implementation would be difficult to provide because it depends on the project, many variables, and the validation process. Overall, I think NGINX App Protect is good. My review rating for this product is 7 out of 10.

NGINX App Protect is easier to automate and configure, or manage from an API. This is good for securing applications. However, it's not suitable for more complex tasks.

NGINX App Protect positively impacted performance changes. There's a cache or it works like a proxy, so it can speed up applications. It can also offload some functions from servers, which NGINX can handle faster.

It has simple functions, especially for CICD pipelines and automation capabilities. The functions are not as broad as the Advanced WAF.

NGINX has signature-based detection, DOS protection, and bot protection.

It doesn't have more advanced features like no false-positive security, which you can configure in Advanced WAF.

It should be simple and easy to manage. The functions cannot be too complex because that would decrease the value of its management. So, I think it's good for now.

It's good support. In some cases, it's fast and helpful, but in others, it's slow and requires escalation. Overall, it's good compared to some other vendors.

I have experience with F5 Advanced WAF (F5), it is a popular F5 product.

I have also used FortiWeb.

The complexity and time for the setup depend on the type of app. With experience, it can take a few minutes to a few hours to install and protect applications on a basic level.

For more granular security, it takes more time to configure, but it's not very difficult with experience.

There are benefits. Implementing it improves network security posture. If you have a CICD pipeline, it's easy to integrate and manage automatically.

I don't know the prices. It's a case-by-case thing.

Compared to Advanced WAF, it is cheaper.

There are scenarios where it's very good to use and implement. I would recommend it for securing specific applications with specific requirements. It's not for everyone, but many customers find it improves security.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.