NGINX vs. SafeDNS

[NGINX] is very well suited for high performance. I have seen it used on servers with 1k current connections with no issues. Despite seeing it used in many environments I've never seen software developers use it over apache, express, IIS in local dev environments so it may be more difficult to setup. I've also seen it used to load balance again without issues.

Incentivized

it is well-suited for the following scenarios:Organizations that need to comply with regulatory requirements related to internet usage, such as data privacy and security laws, and that need to monitor and control employee internet activity.Organizations that are concerned about online threats and need to protect their networks and endpoints from malware, phishing, and other types of malicious content.Organizations that need to improve productivity by reducing distractions for employees, and/or need to restrict access to specific websites during work hours.Organizations that need to protect sensitive data such as customer information, financial transactions and other sensitive data, by monitoring and controlling the internet activity on the back-end systems.However, SafeDNS may not be as appropriate for the following scenarios:Organizations that have very limited IT resources and lack the skills and knowledge required to set up and manage SafeDNS Organizations that have specific needs and requirements that are not met by the features and capabilities of SafeDNS, for example organizations that require advanced threat detection and response capabilities.Organizations that may have limited budget, SafeDNS does require a subscription cost, that might not be feasible for smaller businesses with limited resources.Organizations that are using legacy systems that are not compatible with SafeDNS, that may not be able to integrate it to their infrastructure.

Incentivized

• Very low memory usage. Can handle many more connections than alternatives (like Apache HTTPD) due to low overhead. (event-based architecture).
• Great at serving static content.
• Scales very well. Easy to host multiple Nginx servers to promote high availability.
• Open-Source (no cost)!

Incentivized

• block group of website
• report blocked website tentative
• creation of group of profile, like vendor, client, etc.

Incentivized

• Customer support can be strangely condescending, perhaps it's a language issue?
• I find it a little weird how the release versions used for Nginx+ aren't the same as for open source version. It can be very confusing to determine the cross-compatibility of modules, etc., because of this.
• It seems like some (most?) modules on their own site are ancient and no longer supported, so their documentation in this area needs work.
• It's difficult to navigate between nginx.com commercial site and customer support. They need to be integrated together.
• I'd love to see more work done on nginx+ monitoring without requiring logging every request. I understand that many statistics can only be derived from logs, but plenty should work without that. Logging is not an option in many environments.

• Filtering accuracy: While SafeDNS provides filtering of websites, it's possible that it could be improved to more accurately identify and block unwanted content. This could be achieved by implementing more advanced algorithms or incorporating more data sources.
• Reporting and analytics: Some users may find that the reporting and analytics capabilities of SafeDNS are lacking and could be improved, for example by providing more detailed information about internet usage, or more sophisticated filtering and reporting tools.
• Compatibility: Some organizations may have legacy systems that are not fully compatible with SafeDNS. Improving compatibility could make it easier for these organizations to integrate SafeDNS into their existing infrastructure.

Incentivized

Great value for the product

Incentivized

Front end proxy and reverse proxy of Nginx is always useful. I always prefer to Nginx in overall usability when you have application server and database or multiple application servers and single database i.e. clustered application. Nginx provides really good features and flexibility which helps the system administrator in case of troubleshooting and also from the administration perspective. Also, Nginx doesn't delay any request because of internal performance issues.

Incentivized

Community support is great, and they've also had a presence at conferences. Overall, there is no shortage of documentation and community support. We're currently using it to serve up some WordPress sites, and configuring NGINX for this purpose is well documented.

Incentivized

We have used Traffic, Apache, Google Cloud Load Balancing and other managed cloud-based load balancers. When it comes to scale and customization nothing beats Nginx. We selected Nginx over the others because

• we have a large number of services and we can manage a single Nginx instance for all of them
• we have high impact services and Nginx never breaks a sweat under load
• individual services have special considerations and Nginx lets us configure each one uniquely

Incentivized

No comparison. I never could get the Cisco product to function as it should in the trial and their support was poor.

• Nginx has decreased the burden of web server administration and maintenance, and we are spending less time on server issues than when we were using Apache.
• Nginx has allowed more people in our company to get involved with configuring things on the web server, so there's no longer a single point of failure ("the Apache guy").
• Nginx has given us the ability to handle a larger number of requests without scaling up in hardware quite so quickly.

Incentivized

• prevent offensive content on our materials
• prevent innapropriate use of our materials by the staff

Incentivized