Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy Reviews

The product helps to connect VMs and servers. 

I am impressed with the product's security. 

The solution should be more user-friendly and should have descriptive manuals on the page website. 

I have been using the product for one and a half years. 

The product is stable. 

My company has more than 10 users for the solution. 

The solution's price is normal. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

Our use case is to plug platforms, especially applications that are 
based on website micro services such as containers. 

From our perspective this is a good solution that functions well and has good features. 

We are based in France and it's difficult to find people with sufficient training to assist us. I'd like to see companies with the right level of expertise to help my customers to move their projects from the traditional information system or infrastructures on premise to cloud but it's very difficult to find that here. Google is not well supported in France. 

The initial setup was not so easy. The average deployment time is between one and two years. It requires an initial feasibility study to understand the scope. Once that's established you need to find the path to help set up the right security parameters. The migration is done through scripting and codes. The deployment requires project managers and engineers.

I recommend this solution but it's important to find the right partner and be sure you have a suitable use case. I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Google Cloud Platform's Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy manages our organization's entire user database across the Middle East region for PwC. In addition, the solution is used to run virtual environments and storage solutions. It also serves our needs for AI or any other applications, including using Apps Script.

The solution's speed, processing power, and user functionality are some of its most valuable features.

I think the solution has some issues in document accessing and accessing of some data at times when you have automated scripts. So, maybe that could be made better in the solution. Sometimes, it just fails to get some documents, and then it resumes normally. Google should work to enhance the overall features of the solution.

I have experience with Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy for four and a half years. Also, I am using the latest version of the solution.

The solution offers medium to high stability to its users.

Though I never used the solution from a scalability standpoint, I assume that its scalability would be fine.

I never contacted the solution's technical support team because our organization has an internal IT department.

I previously used Azure. However, my company never used Azure.

The solution's initial setup process was fine. I assume that one person is required for the deployment process of the solution.

I would recommend the solution to those planning to use it in the future. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

This is a service. We use it for our business, for operations. 

This can be deployed easily. 

The solution is stable. It's reliable. 

There is good documentation available. There is a lot of information available online to help new users. 

It is hard to find expertise, ad most people deal with AWS. 

The solution is quite expensive. 

We'd like the solution to continue to make security features more robust. We need to protect against data leaks and also need to protect customer information. 

We've been using the solution for less than a year now. We're a new company.

This is a stable, reliable product. It does not have bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We're a new company. This solution hasn't been used for too long, and we haven't really launched anything yet. Right now, it is still just internally dealt with. Likely less than 100 people deal with it right now. 

The support could be better. There needs to be more knowledgeable. It could be that there aren't enough people with a good knowledge base in our country. Most people are comfortable with AWS, and not necessarily with GCP. However, I don't typically deal with technical support. 

We also use AWS, which is what most companies use. 

The solution is very easy to set up and deploy. It's not a complex process. We can easily deploy applications, APIs, et cetera. However, I did not handle the initial setup myself and therefore cannot speak from firsthand experience. 

We do find it to be more expensive than AWS. 

I'm not sure what version of the solution we're using. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. There's not a problem with deploying it. The business decision comes more about the deployment and support costs and if that makes sense to everyone in the company. It's higher than AWS, which is something that needs to be considered, especially since most people are more familiar with AWS. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It's well documented and does have available support. 

We are a customer and end-user. 

The most valuable features of Google Cloud Platform are the Kubernetes engine, CI/CD, and BigQuery. 

Apigee is a good feature because we analyzed and changed the computer-associated AP to Apigee. We compared the features and created the clusters to change the solution to Apigee. It's a good option on the Google Cloud Platform. And I like BigQuery, which is a fantastic database on the SaaS model. The hard part is creating the pack because our applications are in Azure Data Proxy, Data Fabric, and Data Factory. Our team used these tools in Azure, but in the future, they will transition to GCP.

I've been using Google Cloud Platform for one year.

Google support is outstanding. It's effortless to contact Google engineers, who are all Brazilians. The work is well explained, and they participate in our technical meetings. 

I think the price of Google Cloud Platform is reasonable. However, Microsoft is the most cost-effective solution for us because of Azure's integration. And we already have licenses for Windows Server and the databases, so the price is attractive. And the price of AWS is higher, but we have only two big applications on the AWS. Still, I like Google so much, and my company thinks GCP is the best way to handle our workloads.

I rate Google Cloud Platform nine out of 10. I like the GCP so much because it's flexible. We have tools for similar tech drivers, and we can connect them in the other clouds, where I use the Anthos platform. I created an Anthos platform for similar tech drivers to administer all of the different cloud solutions on the same platform. So, for example, I can put the comments on Cloud Shell and create a resource in the other clouds.

The solution should have better integration. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable.

The technical support is up to par. 

As with AWS, the solution is easy to install. 

50 or 60 days are needed for the deployment. 

Around three or four people are needed for the deployment and maintenance. 

The customer purchases an annually sponsored license. 

We have a maximum of around 20 customers making use of the solution. 

We support Azure, AWS and Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy, depending on the customer's architecture. 

For the most part, I would not recommend the solution to others, as our expertise is more with AWS and Azure.

I rate Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy as an eight out of ten. 

I work in a retail company. We have a physical data center where we use IBM servers. We want to get rid of them because every time we have a peak season, we have to add the infrastructure and then remove it when it is not the peak time. This process of adding the servers, taking notes, and bringing them down requires a lot of operational effort. There is a lot of manual intervention for adding the resources and configuring the servers, which is a lot of work for the company. That's why we are migrating all our applications. 

Google Cloud will help us in getting the additional assistance just by clicking a button. We basically want to automate instead of doing manual interventions. It is an organizational initiative to move to Google Cloud. At least five to ten teams are involved based on each application and around a hundred people are involved.

It is totally awesome in terms of scalability. Its scalability was the main reason for moving to Google Cloud. It also comes with a lot of features. We are satisfied with the features it has.

We have some challenges related to purging the data. We get a lot of data on a daily basis that has to be refreshed on the site, but we are seeing some challenges with that.

They can also include some third-party integration. We have one Akamai dependency. If they can come up with some API to talk to Akamai, it would be good.

I have been using this solution for one a half years. 

It is very stable.

Its scalability is really good.

Their technical support is good. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We get support from Google. There are some Google engineers who visit us on-site, and based on our problem statement, they are able to suggest different approaches and solutions.

Its price is good. For each server, we are saving $300 a month. We have at least thousands of servers. It is a huge cost reduction for us.

I would rate Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy an eight out of ten.

Our financial system is on Oracle-based, SaaS, hosted on the Oracle cloud. From different XML sources, we had to bring in high volumes of transactions into the financial system.

Before we put all of the data into the product and financial system, we need the data to go through some data messaging, and create some rules and derive some values. There are five or six million records every day.

Google has some very good tools on its platform. They have an App Engine and cluster-based programming so that you are able to achieve high performance. 

Because this is a multiple source system, we need a centralized place where all of the data rules are maintained and where all of the data transformations are performed.

Being from an Oracle background, Oracle doesn't have the tools that Google has to transform the high volume data.

It can perform that validation for the high volume transactions in less time, it can be transformed in minutes.

I like this solution. It has a lot of abilities such as data processing and cluster data creation.

The way they use the sources efficiently and the performance are good. The cost is also less, depending on the way that you code.

There is a lot of flexibility and a lot of control if you use this efficiently.

I would like to see the drag and drop features improved. They have a lot of hand-coded coding. Now they are doing less coding and more drag and drop and configuration. 

From a developer's perspective, it would make it simpler and also the less manual coding will lead to fewer defects. Less coding ability but most coding should be automated using a drag and drop functionality.

The setup could be more user-friendly.

In the next release, I would like to see improved drag and drop features, less coding abilities, or zero coding abilities. This would mean that you can do it by using your configurations, or even when you drag and drop it can be an orchestration so that anyone can do it. It would not be just some hand-coded kind of development that will be used by developers in the future.

We are typically a solution provider and we implemented this solution twelve months ago.

It's a stable product.

The scalability is really good.

There are not many end-users who come in and log in every day, because all of these transformations are completed automatically. From the administration standpoint, there are three or four people taking care of the databases and the application layer. The product is all automated and it's a matter of a back and forth thing.

I have not contacted Google support.

We were using Oracle. Previously, we were not using any products. Other products such as JCS and ICS are not this kind of solution. They are that capable. Oracle may have some other products, but I am not aware of it.

The initial setup was ok, although it can be made to be more user-friendly.

The length of deployment depends on the client's requirements. This particular client has very stringent requirements and it had to go through multiple QA processes. It did take some time but that had to do with the change in management.

You need three or four people with varying skillsets if you are implementing this. We had approximately five for this.

I think that the cost is metered based on the data, but I don't have the details.

This is an awesome product.

This solution is pretty automated. When you come from an administrative standpoint, they come and just do some maintenance now and then. They're very few.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is that they have to be very careful. Though this has all of the capabilities, be very careful. Before they engage in the design, you have to understand the volume of transactions you are going to have. What are the turnaround times that you need and the performance considerations? Depending on that, you have to define the architecture of the solution. There are various factors.

There is a thought process before you go into the developing mode.

You have to go through many different people and understand what the restrictions of the various databases that Google has provided are. You have a lot of tools to select before you start developing. There are many tools on this platform and you have to pick the right ones for the right solution. Cost and performance on this type of solution dictate that.

A thorough analysis should be done before you get into this because it's not easy.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.