Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy Reviews

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. 

We use the solution for data engineering, data preparation, and AI.

The tool is really good, especially for ease of implementation and having many options. We can build complex data pipelines and AI models, like web-based AI assistants or chatbots.

Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy should improve stability. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

My company has 10-15 users. 

Support is good, and there is lots of material available online. We usually don't need to call someone, but if we do, it's okay.

straightforward to set up and easy to learn. There are lots of training materials and hands-on labs, making it easy to onboard new team members. Our engineers really like the platform.

There are different pricing plans depending on data volumes and services, but it's comparable to other providers. The value and benefits depend on what we're developing and the specific use case.

I rate Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy an eight out of ten. I'd recommend it. We use both Azure and GCP, and they're both really good. It depends on client preference.

Our use cases for the service include online form submission and PowerPoint and Excel version control.

Google Cloud Platform has the best feature for real-time collaboration.

Stability-wise, the service could be improved.

We have been using Google Cloud Platform for four to five years.

It is a stable service. Although, it could be better. I rate its stability an eight out of ten.

The service is very scalable. We have 200 users for it. Sometimes, we increase its usage by accommodating 300 users depending on the requirement.

We used Alfresco earlier. It is a good solution, but we had to follow some cumbersome steps for installation and deployment.

It is a cloud-based SaaS solution. There is no need to set it up.

The service is quite affordable. We have to pay yearly for it.

I rate Google Cloud Platform 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. 

For Google Cloud Platform (GCP), we use it as our infrastructure. We host our infrastructures and create our machines, services and automation pipelines. For Google Cloud Identity, we use it as an identity portal for all of our applications. In addition, the internal application for the tools is used for monitoring the product.

The Cloud Identity in GCP is very good and reliable. It can be published fast. Also, Google Cloud Identity allows you to create groups and give access by group instead of by user. It allows you to create different access policies for every component of new infrastructure, and from a security perspective, this is good.

The Google Cloud UI has a lot of bugs, and they are working on enhancing it. There are a lot of things that need to be enhanced. For example, sometimes, the snapshot portal makes you have a schedule to create multiple snapshots when you have a huge infrastructure hosted on Google Cloud. Sometimes the browser or the UI hangs when looking for a specific snapshot. Also, Google Cloud support responds very quickly, but the UI still needs to have more enhancements related to the performance.

The integration of the solution for patching, updating, and installing the updates could be better. For example, they have a solution called "always patching," which needs to be enhanced. It is not purely a SaaS solution. It should be mostly platform as a solution, not software.

We have been using this solution for more than two years.

It is a stable solution. However, it would be more stable if Google cared more about the UI.

It is a scalable solution. Most of the teams in our company use this solution. The number of people needed for deployment and maintenance depends on whether it is a small or medium company solution. Only one person is needed for a small environment, while two or three are required for a medium environment. The team that supports the solution comprises network and security people. We plan to increase our usage of the solution as our customer base increases.

The technical support is good, and they are very responsive. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

I personally have used Azure and AWS in the past.

The initial setup was easy, and it was just plug-and-play. If you have a good understanding of infrastructure, this solution is perfect. It allows us to build an entire infrastructure for a startup or medium company in one hour. To do this, we need to try the script with the machines we need. Next, we need to define the CPU, memory and application we want to install on the machine. Then we can click and run the playbook or the tier forms script and go back after hours. By then, everything has been created, and we'll have an infrastructure that can handle a small startup.

The deployment depends on the complexity. If it is a small deployment, it might take less time, but a larger deployment will take more. For example, if we want to use a machine on GCP, it might take about two to three minutes, but if we have a huge deployment for multiple machines with multiple loop balances, records, and firewall rules, it might take 40 minutes to one hour. We completed the deployment in-house.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, I would recommend planning for everything and keeping it simple. It is also important to monitor consumption on the Google Cloud to ensure you are not paying for something you are not using.

Most cloud providers have the same features, but the main difference between them is the solution's availability and cost. Most of the features are only utilized at 30% or 50%.

We use the solution for continuous integration and deployment of applications on databases.

The solution's most valuable features are Google domains, UI setup, easy server access, and intuitive dashboards.

The solution's naming conventions feature needs improvement. We encounter issues while setting up emails as well. They should improve this particular area. Also, they should integrate the solution with more applications.

I have been using the solution for six months.

The solution's stability is good.

We have five solution users in our organization. It is expensive to scale up the solution.

The solution's initial setup was fine. However, it took a lot of work to name the features. The process involves setting up the server, connecting to the gateway, and setting up user access and security codes.

The implementation of the solution was done natively on the platform.

The solution generates a good return on investment.

We pay for the solution’s compute engine every month.

I rate the solution as an eight. I advise others to go through the documentation before deploying it. They can set up a small cluster to practice before implementing it.

It's a cloud-based solution, so it's always the latest version. We use it for identity management, monitor resources, and to monitor the cloud resources. The number of users are small, but the number of resources being managed is large. We plan to roll it out to about 30,000 people.

There is a certain accessibility feature that I can set using a cloud identity, which is really valuable to us.

I think that the documentation could be a bit better in terms of what is presented on the screen versus what actually happens. There's a little bit of confusion under your resource discovery you get in a search bar having to do with the level of complexity of the product design. But I think the documentation could be better.

We have been using Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy for about a year.

It is very stable.

It scales well, in fact, it's quite relevant. We've not put it to an extreme level of scale, but we use it at a medium level of scalability. It's working well.

Google's technical support is really good. In fact, I've only been in touch through email and they've been really responsive. In fact, most of our responses happen in minutes.

The setup is straightforward. I don't think it's a function of how long it takes to set up. it's a continuous deployment. At the time it was a new resource that has to be reconfigured. The initial set up was a few days, but after that its incremental changes that we do.

We've evaluated Microsoft.

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

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.