Signando REST vs. Kong
Security-First instead of Plugin Architecture. Why Kong Gateway isn't sufficient for highest security requirements in critical infrastructure and financial sectors.
Why Teams Switch to Signando REST
Complete Response Validation
Kong only validates incoming requests. Signando REST also validates all backend responses against the OpenAPI schema - protection against data exfiltration.
True Network Isolation
4 separate NATS instances instead of a single process. Even if one component is compromised, other security domains remain protected.
No Plugin Complexity
Kong requires dozens of plugins for security. Signando REST is built for security from the ground up - no plugin management, no compatibility issues.
Memory Safety (Rust)
Kong is based on nginx/Lua (C-based). Signando REST is 100% Rust - no buffer overflows, no memory leaks, no security vulnerabilities from C code.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Signando REST | Kong Gateway |
|---|---|---|
| OpenAPI Schema Validation | Complete | Via Plugin (limited) |
| Response Validation | Complete | Not Available |
| Network Isolation | 4 NATS Instances | Single Process |
| Memory Safety | 100% Rust | C/Lua (nginx) |
| Compliance Ready | ISO 27001, CRITIS | Manual Configuration |
The Problem with Kong as a Security Gateway
Plugin Dependency
Security in Kong means: WAF plugin + Rate Limiting plugin + Auth plugin + ... Each plugin is a potential security risk and maintenance overhead.
No Response Checking
Kong cannot prevent a compromised backend from leaking sensitive data. There is no plugin for complete response validation.
Enterprise Lock-in
Many important security features only in Kong Enterprise. Signando REST offers all security features in a single license.
Ready for Real API Security?
Contact us for a demo and personalized consultation.