Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

The main use cases that our clients typically have and why we propose and implement the solution is for a proxy solution. It's designed to create a proxy site-to-site tunnel between the computer trying to access any resources on the Internet or within the offices. Most organizations have a significant number of remote workers - around 30 to 40 percent of their workforce is remote - and they log in from different locations globally, such as Japan, the US, Europe, and Asia. So they need one solution to cover these remote locations and provide a proxy solution.

In addition, we need to have minimum bandwidth latency, and Zscaler is the most suitable product we see. Whenever a customer comes to us with a large geographical spread in terms of their workforce, we propose and implement this solution across the cloud, as required.

One feature that is valuable to me from an implementation point of view is that it's very easy to implement. We just had to route in some IPs, and it automatically hops into the nearest Zscaler nodes, which they call it. They have more than 150 nodes across the globe. Essentially, if I'm trying to access a server in India at this point in time, and the server I'm trying to access is somewhere in Singapore or Tokyo, it creates a lot of internet latency. But with Zscaler, it's not the case because they have a server in almost every major hotspot in the world. In India, if you're connecting, they will automatically route to their nearest server. Since they have servers in so many places in the world, we can easily configure them to the nearest server. 

The end-user who's using it doesn't feel the latency, and it's really minimal, less than three milliseconds, six milliseconds, whereas the competition has more than ten milliseconds and eleven milliseconds as latency.

There are a couple of areas of improvement in the solution. Firstly, there are some performance issues when we add on additional controls. Zscaler Internet Access is a plain vanilla solution that allows you to add CSV or DLP on top of it. However, once you add these modules, the performance degrades for a bit, and the latency increases significantly. We're talking about a two-fold or three-fold increase in latency. They need to work on this. So the performance goes down when using a lot of features simultaneously.

Moreover, the implementation interface is not very good. It has some minor bugs, and it's not properly streamlined. However, these are not software issues that cannot be resolved. A simple reboot or a call to the reseller personnel can guide you in resolving these issues. But the experience can be more seamless if the interface is improved.

I have hands-on experience with Zscaler Internet Access, a cloud proxy solution similar to Cisco's proxy solution.

We've been working with Zscaler Internet Access for almost three years now. We use the basic Zscaler Internet Access with add-ons like CASB and DLP. This is the solution we sell and implement the most.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. I would rate it a ten out of ten. There are more than 15,000 users under different organizations. They are small and medium-sized businesses. The largest organization that deployed Zscaler had 8,000 users. 

The customer service and support team is good. 

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy. The deployment process is quick, around 6 to 8 weeks. But that depends on the geographical locations we need to cover. If we only need to cover two to three locations, it's good enough.

The deployment process involves building the Zscaler package, which can be vanilla or vanilla plus bundle, and then remotely pushing it to the client machine using Microsoft Intune or whatever it is. Meanwhile, we have to build the configuration and policy based on the client's requirements.

First, what we do is we build the ZScaler package. The package includes the features that will be going through the solution. Once the package is built, it is pushed into the endpoints or machines, such as computers, laptops, and desktops, through Microsoft Intune or SCCM, or any other patching solution that they have. Meanwhile, we configure Zscaler to the nearest hub that the reseller has. They have more than 150 nodes across the globe, so we configure the nearest hub for them. Once that configuration is done, we have established a connection, and the systems have gone online, then you can actually use the solution.

So, it's basically a two-step process. Rolling out the package, rolling out the agent, and configuring the reseller to the nearest hub. That's it. It's a smooth process.

Zscaler is transparent about its pricing model. However, it is not a cheap solution. I would rate the licensing model a seven out of ten. 

My advice, generally, is that if a client has a growth prospect with an increasing number of employees moving across the globe, then Zscaler advises having a product that is scalable and fast. By fast, I mean it has low latency, making it very scalable. Zscaler Internet Access is a completely cloud-based product and is highly scalable. It is a reliable solution to have in your IT stack. 

Overall, I would rate Zscaler an eight out of ten. Zscaler Internet Access is highly scalable and has low latency, making it one of the most reliable products with good market support and presence. I rated it an eight and not a ten because there are a couple of constraints in scaling certain things. For example, some customers, such as federal institutions of the US, state of clutter, or some banks, want an on-premise solution. They want more control because Cloud will always have a security issue somewhere or the other, and Zscaler Internet Access does not have an on-prem solution. Also, when you increase the features, it does lag a bit, which should not happen.

We can use the solution for users that are working from home. It allows us to manage control over security. We install an agent and can set the domains that are allowed on the network. It helps ensure security.

It can be easily accessed by the cloud. Users can easily work from home while maintaining company security.

The servers are hosted in the cloud, and it maintains security for Azure. It's like having double security - one for the cloud and one for the user.

It is simple to use. We can create multiple tunnels with ease. It's simpler to use than a VPN.

The solution is stable.

We'd like for them to include some sort of antivirus tool. It would help if that came bundled with this product from a security standpoint. 

We'd like to have a server connector without ht need for multiple micro tunnels. 

We just completed a POC. I just started with the company.

The stability is good. The solution is reliable. We've had no issues with stability. I'd rate the stability eight out of ten.

We have almost 300 users.

I'd rate the scalability six out of ten. The policy creation is difficult. It's complicated to add them, and therefore scaling may take a while. 

I don't really deal with technical support. We get support from a third-party vendor, not Zscaler directly.

We have used a different solution in the past. Zscaler, we can deploy on VM servers.

We've only completed a POC and plan to roll out a full implementation soon. In the past, I have implemented it completely as well. We are planning to deploy for the sales users first. 

It's not a difficult process. Once the agent is installed, it needs to be verified with the console. The deployment takes between 30 to 45 days, depending on the level of support needed to complete the task. The issue is our sales team are work from home users. That can make the process longer. 

We also need to create user policies before the full deployment happens. Different policies are needed for different users. We may need to create three to four different policies for different user sets. 

We have a third party that we get the solution. 

We have yet to receive the cost from Zscaler. We've only done a POC. My understanding is the solution is reasonably priced. I'd rate the pricing eight out of ten.

We are an end-user. We may be a future partner.

It is good for a small environment of 80 to 100 users. I'm not sure if it works for very large organizations. This solution requires less maintenance and makes server access easy - instead of, for example, standalone VPN access.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We use the solution for web security services such as DLP, VPN, BPA, ZIA, and CASB.

We needed a solution to control the user traffic on the internet earlier. But now, with Zscaler's help, we can adequately handle the data using CASB. Also, we can control URLs and Web accesses with the help of its web security gateway feature. Along with this, we are controlling the data leak assessment on the internet with DLP's help.

The solution's most valuable feature is the well-structured functioning of services. It allows us to monitor things in the best possible way. It has all the features separated well from each other. For instance, they have a separate portal in case one wants to control anything on the internet. The other valuable feature is its ability to audit the reports well.

They recently improved a few things with the new version. They should enhance the audit reporting feature. They are providing a very basic DLP solution, but it needs improvement. If they improve the DLP solution, it will be a better solution in the future. They should work on the bandwidth of the CASB solution as well. 

We started the solution's POC in October but it is not yet fully deployed.

The solution’s customer service is good.

Positive

I have done the POC for Cisco Umbrella and Netskope before. Netskope is a user-friendly solution. But Zscaler is better than other solutions regarding its monitoring services.

The solution’s setup is pretty straightforward, but it depends on your experience with Zscaler. It would get a bit difficult for a new buyer owing to multiple profile setups and configurations during the process. I rate the solution’s initial setup as a nine.

I rate the solution's pricing as seven. It is costlier than other solutions. They have multiple standard licenses, but there is no additional cost included.

If you want to establish the right controls from a web security perspective, it's one of the best products in the market. Again, opting for the solution depends on the particular requirement. If you are looking for a solution for banking services, then, you should go with Symantec Blue Coat for a better DLP solution. But if you need a mix of VPN, CASB, and Web Security Gateway, then Zscaler is the better solution.

I rate the solution as an eight out of ten.

I like the granularity of the control of all the traffic, including SSL inspection. I also like the fact that the user interface is intuitive.

The latencies with Zscaler are minimal compared to those of any other competitor. Other competitors do not really have the global scale that Zscaler has and cannot promise low latencies.

Zscaler should continue to make the user interface better. They should also improve the backup network and continue to expand it so that it can handle larger numbers of customers.

We've been working with this solution since 2017. Our customers use a cloud deployment of this solution.

The stability overall in the developed regions, such as the US and Europe, is fairly good. In certain regions, such as South Africa, Zscaler has not been stable for some time.

It is easy to scale. Additional sites and licenses can be added quickly and easily.

Zscaler's technical support is not too bad. They have been helpful when I have had issues, but I have not had to contact them much.

The initial deployment process is quite easy. I've implemented Zscaler Internet Access in large, multinational corporations and recently at a company that is in 64 countries in the world. The deployment is always fairly quick. I have also worked with smaller clients, and Zscaler deployment is even easier in these cases.

Zscaler is an expensive solution, but it's worth the price. 

Their services are unmatched by competitors. Some may come with half the features that Zscaler can offer and be much cheaper. However, they do not have the global coverage that Zscaler has, and they will not provide the same low latencies and the same speeds that Zscaler can.

My advice would be to ensure that you have a good implementer and reseller who can provide guidance. The reseller should be aligned with those who work in security and needs to be aware of anything that might need an exception that needs to be created. This will help avoid any surprises when the solution is live. The other important aspect to consider is training.

Overall, I would rate Zscaler at eight on a scale from one to 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.

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. 

We are using the latest version of the solution. It's deployed on a private cloud through Zscaler.

We mostly use this solution in the distributed network where direct internet access has been growing. There are a lot of branches connected with their own internet access, so the solution secures the connectivity at remote locations. There's a very large network with many branches and users working across the globe.

There are about 5,000 people using this solution in my organization. Technical support uses this solution 24/7. We have an operations team and a monitoring and management team.

This solution helps to protect our network.

The cloud proxy and integration are some of the key features. Since there is cloud waste, we can quickly provision it and start working on the configuration. On top of that, they have added a few more features. They have integrated CASB, and file sandboxing is part of it.

We have used this solution for three years. We have seen a lot of traction in the market and a lot of users adopting this solution. We're able to control or manage all the remote locations from one place. When a user is traveling from one location and is connected to the internet, it connects to the bigger cloud and relevant policies will be applied to the user or the device. We have expanded the base from very few users to a large number.

The solution is expensive. They recently revised the pricing and packaging. Some of our existing customers have been asking for alternate solutions for a lower price.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

It's stable.

It's scalable.

Sometimes I feel that the Zscaler team is a bit lacking. The response is slow sometimes.

I would rate technical support three out of five. 

Setup isn't complicated.

I would rate setup as four out of five. Setup took a couple of hours because of some of the requirements. It can take up to a month depending on how many policy configurations need to be done and how many users there are.

Deployment was done in-house.

There are multiple bundles: enterprise, business, and transformation. Transformation includes all the features, but recently I've seen a few more line items that are additional costs. Overall, it's expensive.

They have standard bundling and additional licensing, which is a high cost.

We also evaluated Blue Coat. We have used Forcepoint too, but there were a lot of support challenges. That's why we went with Zscaler.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten. 

The product is pretty good. They are the leader, as far as Gartner Magic Quadrant is concerned. The functionality and bundling are good, but the pricing isn't great. I think Netskope is competition because of their features and better pricing.

The competition offers more flexibility. This is a cloud solution, so a lot of banking customers and government customers are a bit reluctant to use it. Some of the competition has the on-premises model as well. Zscaler could also work on their bundling, packaging, and pricing.