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. 

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.

The primary use case is to secure internet traffic. Users want to make sure that the site doesn't have DDoS attacks or any malware. Zscaler is able to protect data for individual organizations and for the country as well.

Basically, the standard traditional model of a firewall becomes obsolete when you implement Zscaler. It goes into the secure web gateway, and it removes the hardware requirement and the annual recurring costs and the annual maintenance costs for clients, which is quite important and beneficial for smaller SMB organizations.

The best thing about Zscaler Internet Access is the website filtering. In the UAE it's quite an important feature because most of the malware comes through the SQL injection and through downloads from websites. Zscaler helps protect against that. It is very important for a telco provider, so that their customers, who rent or who buy those services from them, do not have an issue.

In terms of usage, here in the GCC, it's still growing a growing market, so the combination of DLP, data leak prevention, to a certain extent is fine. But what it requires is user-based access or role-based access. The solution needs to grow into that, which definitely takes time. There's not an easy way to integrate it when you have a cloud-based solution.

The only DLP you can have is for the web, such as iboss. The DLP part is quite crucial for this particular region.

DLP, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and some algorithms can be built into the solution. There are certain pet algorithms for AI and machine learning which everybody is moving towards, so that needs to be added to the solution as well.

We haven't had any issues or any complaints from the customer in regards to the stability of the solution. Usually, the stability depends on the end-user as well, for example, how much usage or how much they know about the technology or the product. 

For Zscaler, it is scalable for anywhere from five users up to 5,000 or 10,000 users, because of the MSS model when at telco providers. For an individual company, it is still quite easy for them to scale, based on how much hardware or cloud services they want to deploy. It's pretty easy to scale, as the organization scales.

In general, if you want to look at the number of users, this solution can deploy anywhere from five users up to 10,000 users quite easily from an MSS model, managed services model. When you talk about an on-prem model, however, scaling needs to be deployed at phases. It cannot be deployed in one go for anywhere from 1,000 to 3,000 users. It has to go through a deployment phase.

We don't have experience with the vendor's technical support, as we offer our own. 

There are three levels of technical support that we provide. The first level comes when we charge the customers on the technical support if our engineer needs to go on-site and help. 

The second level of support is, if it's an MSS program, through the telco provider. 

If they still need help, then it has to go to the vendor. We always try to help our clients first instead of directing them to vendors.

If you go for the MSS model, managed services model, then the initial setup is very straightforward. You register with the telco and the services are switched on. When you want to stop paying for that, you just turn the services off. That's how simple it is.

If you go for an on-prem model, there are going to be certain challenges surrounding how it needs to be deployed. It's dependant on the client. If the client is a cloud-native organization, it becomes easier. But if the client, SMB client or enterprise client, is not cloud-native, then it is a little expensive for them.

If all the prerequisites are met and the hardware requirements are met for an on-premises model, it takes about a week to deploy the solution. That would be for a small scale organization of about 300 users.

If it is an MSS, you can expect it to take one week. That's only if all the prerequisites are met. If the prerequisites are not ready, it can take up to three to four months. It also depends on the client and how they are looking to deploy it. If they want to go phase by phase or they want to do a full-time deployment, for example.

We are consultants. We handle the implementation ourselves.

The return on investment usually comes in anywhere between three to six months, for a large enterprise. For an SMB, it usually is apparent after two to three months.

Pricing varies from customer to customer, depending on the hardware that is required and the deployment model.

Our clients might evaluate other options, like iboss and Fortinet. We offer Zscaler.

With MSS service providers, they prefer to have an on-prem OPEX-based deployment model. Like telecom providers or data center service providers, they buy the service and roll it out to customers or sell it to their own customers for a monthly fee. We have a mix of clients who prefer to have private clouds and hybrid models.

There is competition, with, for example, iboss and Fortinet in the region. iboss is hardware-free but the company is young and still growing. It's not there yet. Zscaler, however, the way they have matured the market and have become a mature model, makes them preferred over other vendors or other brands.

In terms of implementing Zscaler, it's quite straightforward, but even having a straightforward technology like Zscaler requires a consultative approach of which are the critical areas where the service needs to be deployed first. That needs to be studied as per the cybersecurity guidelines so that the right protocols are implemented.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten. 

They still have some features to integrate. The solution is still evolving.

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.

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.