Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

In the past, I prepared a comparative stable between Zscaler and other concurrent or alternative solutions. I saw that Zscaler has a good mark in many criteria. We use Zscaler for centralized data loss prevention (DLP) for web, endpoint, and email. It also has the capacity for SD-WAN integration, threat installation, and is easy to deploy compared to other solutions.

Zscaler, by offering many solutions for workload and remote workforce connectivity, has improved our organization's productivity. It leverages AI for threat intelligence and malware detection, which enhances our security measures.

Zscaler offers a centralized DLP solution for web, endpoint, and email. It also provides SD-WAN integration and an inspection feature that inspects one hundred percent of traffic, ensuring it is secure and meets our connectivity needs.

There are many functionalities in Zscaler Internet Access that need improvements, such as an advanced firewall and logging capabilities to track calls.

I have been using Zscaler Internet Access for one year now.

The stability is rated an eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability of the solution as eight or nine out of ten.

Customer service sometimes is not helpful, with long waiting times when issues arise. However, in some cases, the support team is faster and satisfactory.

Neutral

Before using Zscaler Internet Access, we used another solution, which secured us with a gateway.

I'd rate the setup nine out of ten. It is a relatively easy setup process.

We have seen measurable benefits, such as improvements in security measures and productivity. However, experiences with customer service have been mixed.

Compared to other solutions, Zscaler Internet Access is higher in cost.

Based on my experience, I recommend Zscaler Internet Access.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We use the tool to manage all end-user traffic. It's mainly for web filtering on every device, not for backend server traffic. 

Zscalar Internet Access is for Internet security, like an Internet security gateway. I like how it runs seamlessly in the background with a single sign-on. The controls you can have on devices for Internet security are good, and it doesn't impact speed wherever you're connected. Overall, I think it's very good so far.

The solution's pricing is on the higher side. It would be better if it could be lower. 

I have been using the product for a year. 

The product is quite stable. There were some challenges with speed and performance when connected to a different region, but once they fixed the policy and routed through our region, everything worked fine.

The tool should be scalable - we have many employees, and it's covering well. I can't comment on limitations for other companies with thousands of computers.

We pushed it through policy to all computers, so we didn't need people to do it manually. You need someone overseeing it but not heavily involved or specifically dedicated. It can be handled with other workloads.

The main reason for getting the solution was for better security, not for time or management savings. It didn't decrease effort for our security team, but it improved our overall security posture.

I like Zscaler Internet Access. We've been using it for a while, and it's working very well. However, we're still in the early stages of identifying the full solution and requirements.

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use the solution for internet access, web-based policies, and application-based policies. It has a device posture profile, which is new. 

DNS security is in progress now. I have done the test cases in my lab, however, now we are deploying it for 30,000 users. I'm working on that project as well. Apart from that, I have worked in ZIA's firewall and DLP.

The product is simple yet has a lot of features.

It offers a straightforward setup process. Setting up the solution is simple.

The solution is stable and reliable.

Users can scale the product.

There are some flaws which I don't like. Mostly I was an engineer for the proxy. In that case, there are limitations. There are limited categories and limited URLs which we can create.

We'd like to see a more user-friendly interface. 

Technical support could be better. They should be more technical. Also, they need to ensure when you ask for help, they communicate better amongst themselves what the issue is so that customers aren't constantly repeating themselves. 

I've been using the solution for about one year. 

It's quite stable and offers good performance. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable.

It's scalable and easy to expand. 

We have multiple clients that use the solution. We have between 8,000 and 50,000 clients. 

I've contacted technical support multiple times. They are okay. However, they could be better. We sometimes need more technical responses.

Often, our support person will change, and then we have to explain over and over the issue, what went wrong, and what's been done. It may take days to resolve things even if it is a simpler case due to the repetition and the fact we are changing from support staff to support staff. 

Neutral

The solution is very straightforward and simple to set up.

Users just decide if they want to connect via desktop or remote VDI servers, and that's it. They decide on what ports and protocols they want to connect. Once that question is clear, then they just have to just create the connection between the cloud and between the enterprise. After that, it's all about the configuration once you are done on the portal.

I don't deal with the licensing aspect. I can't speak to pricing. 

I'd rate hte solution seven out of ten. 

We use Zscaler to secure endpoints using a proxy.

This solution is used by 500 people. We have plans to increase usage by 10-20%.

It's a cloud based solution.

The most valuable feature is the ability to drop packets.

The OS capabilities and WSL support could be improved.

I have used this solution for about four years.

It's not very stable, but I think Zscaler is trying to improve that. This solution is typically deployed in endpoint environments like Windows, Linux, and even WSL, which is the Windows encapsulated version of Linux.

It's scalable.

We have used technical support to identify configurations, help us set up new use cases, and to secure endpoints that we want to be integrated.

Setup is about medium difficulty. We needed more background information on how to set up a proxy. Setup could be easier.

It took between 30 minutes and one hour to set up the solution, activate our Zscaler company profile, and to configure ZIA.

The solution is a little bit expensive. On a scale of one to five, I would rate it as a three.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to those who want to start using it.

It's a cloud based solution, so Zscaler provides everything needed to set up and start using it, without complex requirements.

Basically, they usually are the endpoint VPN connection to secure the end-user device. They also integrate with the SD One solution to form a secure endpoint assessment for the SD One, with security from the endpoints to the network.

It serves as protection for the endpoint, especially laptops, to secure any internet access. Even when you assess the wireless itself, they also make sure that the traffic from the laptop is encrypted.

The way they do it is very easy to use at the moment. If you power on the laptop, they will survey. It's very easy for the user. The user doesn't really need to do anything except make sure that the access is there. That's all.

The initial setup is very straightforward.  

It is easy to scale. 

The solution is stable. 

If they can also integrate with the multi-factor authentication to prompt users to do another, second-factor authentication, that would be ideal. 

I've used the solution for 18 months. 

The solution is very stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale very well. 

Very minimal technical support has been required since the solution is so stable and easy to use. 

The implementation process is easy. The agent they use runs very smoothly.

They do have a minimum number of users required to make it viable. You need to have 500 users. Based on the licensing scheme, they offer 500 users. The initial level would be $3/month per user.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It is very easy to use.

We primarily use the solution for a secure web gateway and secure internet access. 

We wanted something for an overall internet access solution, an in-office, and out-of-office solution. We chose Zscaler Internet Access. 

It is very transparent. 

It securely transfers internet connectivity seamlessly, without any problems or issues. It's very simple for the user. 

The product offers easy deployment. 

Security is very strong. There is seamless integration as well.  

There is no lag in service when accessing the internet. 

The initial setup was straightforward. 

It is scalable. 

The solution is stable. 

The technical support could be better. We need more of an online knowledge base, so we don't have to lodge tickets whenever we have a question or issue. 

We'd like to have more plugins and integration. 

Even in a CASB scenario, if we could get API and JSON-contained decoding, that would be helpful.

I've used the solution for over a year. 

The solution is stable and secure. We haven't had any issues. The product is great.

We have more than 1,000 people using the solution. 

The scalability is really good. We've had no issues with the scalability. We even don't know when the performance tuning is happening in the back end. The user is not experiencing any problems, even if all thousand-plus users have started using it at the same time. There's no slowness or lag which is experienced.

We use it on a daily basis and plan to increase usage in the future. 

If you want some support, you have to log a case. However, if there was more online support or a knowledge base that was readily available, it would be better. 

Positive

The set up is very straightforward. It's a pretty easy process. The deployment scenario is pretty simple. You can just deploy it through a simple policy. You can deploy it even in terms of the distribution of hardware to users. 

To set it up took about three and a half weeks, from beginning to end. 

I'd rate the ease of deployment at a four or 4.5 out of five. 

After it is set up, there isn't really much maintenance. 

We handled the deployment in-house. 

After three or five years, after not having any bad experiences, we can see some ROI. 

The solution is quite expensive. It's around double what others are offering. The price we pay includes everything. It comes as a bundle. 

I'd rate the affordability of the solution at a two or three out of five. 

While the product quality is very good, the price is very high.

We have looked into Netskope.

I'm an end-user. 

I am dealing with the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. The only downside is that it is so expensive. 

The solution is used to manage and protect end users' access to internet resources, websites, and web applications while checking for malicious or bad content in order to grant or block access to certain sites.

This solution has a lot of valuable features. The most valuable features of the solution are URL filtering, CASB, data leak prevention, DLP, and also ZDX a digital experience monitoring option.

The solution can be improved by advancing some of the newer technologies such as the DLP feature, and adding email security.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The solution is not perfect and things can go wrong but it is stable. In the last two years that I've been working with it, we did experience a small outage for a group of customers in a particular region for a few hours. Those customers all received service credits for the outage and it was fixed quickly. I give the stability a nine out of ten.

The scalability is perfect. I would give it a ten out of ten.

Customer service and support are good but there is always room for improvement. We do a lot of our own technical support so we don't have a need to call them often. When customer service and support are needed they are usually there. I give them an eight out of ten.

Positive

The setup is straightforward. If a customer orders all of the features there is a lot of configuration work to do, or they can choose to leave the features in the standard setup. We recommend they take a few days with one of our consultants who are familiar with the solution so they can point them in the right direction. The configuration is based on individual requirements.

The implementation was done in-house, using one of our engineers.

The ROI of the solution is excellent. I give it a ten out of ten.

The solution replaces multiple vendor technologies with one which makes it worth the cost. It is a few pounds per user per month. Occasionally a customer will kick back because they believe it is too expensive for them.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

Although the solution is easy to configure, there is good value in spending two or three days with an expert that can save a lot of time and effort setting things up in order for you to get real value out of it quickly.

One of the use cases is VPN replacement. Zscaler Private Access replaces the VPN solution.

Zscaler covers all the features needed to replace a VPN or proxy solution. They are good. They've been on the market for 15 years now, so they are mature enough.

Zscaler needs to add client-to-client communication. It's always client-to-server communication. The cloud and branch connectors could be improved because we're still dependent on traditional firewalls. They should eliminate this. They should also provide WAN devices should to compete with the SD-WAN solutions also.

We have been building our competency and trying to sell Zscaler to customers for almost two years. We are doing this in our labs also, and we have one customer now. 

Zscaler is scalable. 

Zscaler is a cloud-based solution, so it's scalable. 

We worked with Zscaler support initially for some professional services. That service was excellent, but later we had to wait for them to make some changes, so that could be tricky. I rate Zscaler support seven out of 10. 

Neutral

Deploying Zscaler is quick and straightforward. You can easily onboard end-users to Zscaler Private Access once you deploy the application. There is a virtual application in your private data centers that detects the applications, and you can control access.

We have two or three engineer to deploy the solution. Two are usually needed  because there are different roles from a backup point of view, and we have a different set of people during the design stage. We need some people who understand identity solutions. We have a combination of two or three engineers who normally do deployment for around 1,500 users. One person is usually more than sufficient for maintenance because we don't get that many inquiries unless some changes are needed.

We work on a business case, not on ROI, so if the customer sees a positive savings on their business case after the five years or six years, they normally go for Zscaler.

The license is per user, and there's a minimum license per user per year. It's costly if you compare it to the traditional solutions like Symantec or Bluecoat. It's about 20 to 30 percent costlier than the traditional solution, but it gives you the flexibility to work from anywhere, and everything becomes effortless. 

I rate Zscaler Internet Access eight out of 10.