Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

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 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.

I mainly use Zscaler Internet Access for internet security and filtering.

Zscaler Internet Access's roaming user feature is most valuable and is much better compared to other secure web gateways. 

The main issue with Zscaler Internet Access is proxy IP detection, which sometimes makes sites inaccessible. Its pricing could also be improved. In the next release, I'd like Zscaler to include local-directory integration.

I've been using Zscaler Internet Access for around eight months.

Zscaler Internet Access is stable.

Zscaler Internet Access is scalable.

Zscaler Internet Access's technical support is excellent.

Positive

The initial setup was easy - I would rate the setup process four out of five.

We used an in-house team.

We pay around 6,500 INR per user per year, which is very expensive. I would rate Zscaler's pricing one out of five.

I would recommend Zscaler for traveling users but FortiGate for in-house users. I would give Zscaler a rating of eight out of ten.

The solution is a cloud service, so when you have Zscaler Internet Access, you still often require firewall appliances at the edge to act as gateways to Zscaler. There are certain elements that you can't necessarily ever extract at a network level, which makes it difficult to go completely appliance-less.

You could see it as a downside, but if there's an unavoidable reality of how networking is addressed at this point, and I think that's the only thing that for us is unfortunate, having to always retain some type of alternate firewall or router capability inside the network in order to get to Zscaler, as an example.

We've noticed a trend of Linux support being available at a mobile and workstation level, which isn't available from Zscaler yet, but we are expecting it soon. Zscaler also doesn't offer easy Cisco Meraki integration, which is also on the roadmap, even though we've seen it becoming very common. If we try and use Zscaler with Meraki, it's a fairly manual process to get Meraki to connect to Zscaler, whereas in all other SDware products, there's a lot more automation. 

The only other thing we would love to see in Africa would maybe be an additional Zscaler hub in another strategic location like Kenya to really round out Africa because there are only two hubs in over 30 countries on the continent. One is in South Africa and one is in Nigeria. Africa is kind of a black hole for all cloud providers, which makes life tough for us because there are performance issues when delivering cloud-related services. A little bit more penetration into Africa would help with this.

At a platform level, it's very stable.

One of the primary features of Zscaler is that it's obviously infinitely scalable. That's one of the reasons we like it. It takes away the bottlenecks that we've seen in appliances historically. You can typically grow quite fast.

As long as the platform that they have, that we're connected to, is scaled property, which is their responsibility, then it should be very good. We did hit a problem a while back where they didn't scale properly and we had some major issues. We just hope that it'll never be repeated. It's all about how they manage it, however.

We have about 80,000 users right now. We're selling to more customers, so we're trying to double that number in the next 18 months.

Technical support has been generally very responsive at picking up the tickets in a fairly short amount of time. My experience has been very good.

We didn't previously use a different solution.

The initial setup was straightforward. The biggest thing for us was to build our own policies. The deployment itself was only a few hours.

We are an integrator and a service provider for Zscaler in the region, so we handled the implementation ourselves.

We have seen an ROI, but the return of investment isn't really as strong as we would like. That has more to do with the reality that South Africa is a very unique and difficult market and the rand depreciation has made all global services expensive in this market. Zscaler, however, leads the local market in value versus functionality. 

Roughly, we might spend $70,000 a month on the solution.

We don't pay for anything beyond the standard licensing fee.

We work with the customers that use a range of different types of proxy services. In my personal experience, I've only ever used Zscaler.

We use the ZIA Business Suite, a version of Zscaler Internet Access.

We use the public cloud deployment model.

The solution is very straightforward. That's what we like about the cloud - all the capabilities that are there, and that are available immediately.

There are things customers really have to have before they integrate the Zscaler. They need to understand ADFS and have it integrated properly into their own network. As long as the customers that you work with do the work required of them before integrating Zscaler, then it's seamless. The problems we encounter happen when customers don't get to the point they need to in order to take it on as a product. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

We leverage it for web proxy and web security.

All internet access flows through the Zscaler proxy, regardless of whether people are in office or remote. I have greater control site access and I minimize the number of compromises that we experience to almost none.

Generally, the web proxy feature blocks malicious sites so that my end users don't inadvertently get compromised.

It needs better integration with other applications. It takes a fair amount of regular activity to apply the by-passes because it is very strict in its restrictions and frequently you have to go in and open things up to allow the workforce to work.

The logs that are consumed by our security solution could be a bit more definitive, from an audit perspective. It's sometimes difficult to determine which end user a particular generated alert is associated with.

Stability is good. We have a presence around the globe, it's very localized and that minimizes any kind of latency. Even though they still complain about it.

Scalability is good. Right now our internal workforce is around 120. I have no plans to increase the usage for now. They do have some features we don't use currently.

Technical support is effective.

In the past, we did use some other products. We used OpenDNS which subsequently became Umbrella. Zscaler is easier to manage than OpenDNS but now I think that product is even.

There is a short learning curve on the setup, so it's not complex, but it's not necessarily trivial either. The entire deployment took two to three hours. 

We have about 1.5 persons who manage all of our internal IT apps.

We did the implementation ourselves. 

There aren't any additional costs to the standard licensing fees.

Pay attention to the Zscaler recommended best practices. Don't try to figure it out on your own. Go with what they say to do.

I would rate it an eight 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 use it for security. We installed it on our work computers and also for other traffic from the office. We are using it for perimeter security and that is useful for us.

I will give you an example. Before implementing a computer scan on all PCs, our main problem was when we received a phish or something like it. It was impossible for us to tell if it was people from inside or outside our organization that clicked on it. If people that were inside our organization had different appliances for checking the traffic, you had to connect each appliance and get the receipt from that URL. It was a little bit complicated. With the scanner, for example, if somebody clicks on a bad URL you just add that to the reporting part and in a matter of minutes it generates a report, where you can see exactly who clicked on that link and who did something before you got a chance to block that malicious URL. That is the first benefit that comes to my mind and I think it was a huge improvement in our site. Having a centralized firewall that protects the whole topography is quite awesome when you also have users that are not on the plan because it actually improves visibility of those users.

I cannot say that I found only one feature that is most valuable, but I can tell you that I find value in traffic scanning and samples. That I think is quite valuable for all their software. The scanning feature is impressive, because they do not introduce a big latency to the traffic. I really like how they manage this part.

On the technical side, the only thing that I believe this scanner can improve is in the way they allocate traffic. For example, a big site doesn't have the ability to have its IPs inside the cloud, so Zscaler doesn't allocate you certain IPs for traffic. Your traffic goes to the nearest Zscaler point, and from there you get an IP. Sometimes that is problematic, because your users use the same IPs that another client is using so you don't get the ability to do some rules using some IPs. For example, you cannot use conditional access to high influence IP. You can't say if somebody goes to Zscaler I know that traffic is secure so I can let them past. In this scenario you cannot do this, because Zscaler is using a pool of IPs and they'll circle them for all the clients. I would like to see the ability to choose a pool of IPs for my company, set up rules based on them, and know that those IPs are not used by other companies.

We've been using Zscaler for 4 years.

The product is mature. I can't say it's not stable. It's been there for a while now and it proves that it can do the job according to what they say they do. I cannot say that they are not doing the best of what they think they should do. So at this point, they have a mature product and are working quite okay.

There are no issues there. The number of users doesn't matter, whether you have 100 users or 2,000 users. The only impact you'll have is on financial side. For 100 users you will pay differently than 10,000 users, so I don't think you have an issue on this side.

All our users have libraries on their computers. So if they have a device from the company, they have Zscaler on it. I think we have about 3,000 users in my company.

We have one or two people on maintenance from the global networking team. You don't need to do something special, it just works. The only thing we need to do is check daily if there are any threats, as well as to verify the US dollar and stuff like that. In terms of maintaining it, doing something to make it work, you don't have to worry about that. It's a cloud provided solution. The only thing that you have to concentrate upon is the business side. You have to see how your business is affected, what type of traffic you have in there, and check security threats on your site. That's it. The product by itself is run by the Zscaler team and they do a good job. We do not have maintenance debts. The only incidence that I remember is last month they were blocking our site or something , but that was solved quickly with support from Zscaler.

I did not get any experience directly, I got some instance of indirect support. I asked networking for something and they work directly with the support. My impression was that they responded quickly, relatively speaking. I don't know exactly how it works on the other side, but my impression indirectly was that they offer quick support.

no cloud solution and we had to route back to office the road warriors trafic 

From what I discussed with my colleagues from the network that we were working with, it wasn't a difficult process. I cannot tell you how long it took.

We didn't have a similar solution. We had a solution, but we didn't have something cloud-based as a security solution, so I would say we did not use any cloud security-based system.

Check if a product like this makes sense for you. And look at the specifics: what you need in terms of security and what features you would like to have in it. Zscaler is one solution. It's a good solution, but it doesn't do everything. First of all, analyze a few solutions and make a demo. Without a demo, I do not recommend moving forward, because any security solution comes with a price. There is also the financial price, to know if that is okay for your company. Usually Zscaler works best for companies that have users that do not stay in an office. They have road warriors. I would recommend it for companies that have a lot of users moving from here to there.

I would rate Zscaler as eight out of ten. It's not an ideal solution, one of the things is that I do not have my IP fully inside it. For example, you have countries where they don't have a lot of presence and then sometimes they go to another country where they have a presence or data center. When you come back to the other country, and you have to open a fiber, it can be geographically restrictive. I find my country and am going through by neighborhood. When I come back to my country, I cannot see it because I'm geographically restricted. I'm not part of that country, so that's one reason Zscaler isn't ideal.