Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

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.

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.

We are using the solution for internet security. It's mostly web-based filtering.

We are into this modern world, meaning, we are working from home in hybrid scenario. Due to the pandemic, we have seen a lot of shifts towards a hybrid model of work. That provides lots of challenges in terms of security including, how to protect the users' machines and other devices. That is one of the core use cases. Wherever you are, you need to be protected. However, the traditional approaches such as a legacy-based proxy system won't work. 

If we have some kind of critical systems, we need to figure out how we can provide the access to all these users, all these remote or roaming users, access to these critical areas, and we need to eliminate those legacy-based VPNs. Zscaler is doing it best. Zscaler offers the best service since you are protected wherever you are.

The internet access is great. It offers good web filtering. It has DLP features. We can monitor our networks with ease. We can monitor the usage, bandwidth, chop, chalking, all these things we can monitor. On top of that, it is providing advanced threat protection ATP, which means any kind of malicious network or malicious payloads that are going through our network can be detected and it can be blocked. We can have a certain kind of block list. There are multiple levels of features.

We have fewer issues with Zscaler.

In terms of user experience, that is also excellent. 

In terms of reporting to senior management, it gives us a clear picture of what needs to be achieved about that solution.

It is easy to set up the solution. 

The solution is stable.

It is a scalable product. 

In terms of user experience, it could be better. It all depends upon the configuration, though. At the moment, they are one of the best. In terms of room of improvement, it depends upon the specific use cases of the customers.

For example, it might be that some of the users are having some kind of connectivity issue. It depends upon how those users are connected. It may not be a product issue. Or maybe they are using a VPN. Local banks won't allow connectivity to their application over a VPN or over a cloud-based proxy service, for example. In some countries, the local banks restrict these kinds of communications. There needs to be some whitelisting done to get those users connected. 

At the moment, we are trying to onboard that solution. In my previous organization, I have used that solution. In my current organization, we are trying to onboard the solution.

It is a stable solution. I never faced any kind of downtime for my critical services. They have a higher availability. If one of the locations goes down, automatically, it'll scale to a preferred location.

The solution scales very well. 

In the last three or four years, there has been a shift towards this product. We likely will increase usage. 

I've never directly dealt with technical support. My team handles any issues and would deal with them directly.

It is easy to set up. However, you need manpower and you need a team to deliver these kinds of things. It's not a plug-and-play thing. It has lots of configurations. We need to deploy the agents. We need to set up those configurations. If we have multiple offices, we need to understand the routing and what mechanisms are in place. That's why it takes a team.

The length of deployment depends on the company and environment. You're looking at the number of networks, the number of servers. 

I can't speak to the costs. I don't handle the licensing. 

I'm a customer and end-user. 

I'm not sure of the exact version of the solution.

Zscaler is a cloud service provider, so they are hosting their services on their own cloud. They might be using the public cloud. I'm not sure. However, it's not an on-premise solution. It's a cloud-based proxy.

You need to perform that due diligence. You need to understand your use cases, including the number of users and how many are working from home or roaming, et cetera. You need to understand hosting, and how to protect servers. There's a lot of understanding you need to have before you can begin implementing anything.  

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

It's a proxy solution, and we use it for reverse proxy, DNS security, and storage security.

The users are at different locations, and Zscaler helps us to put the organization's central security controls on these roaming users.

The performance needs improvement. Some areas create performance issues and, depending on the use cases, require reconfiguration to perform again.

I've been using this solution for one and a half years.

It's on Zscaler cloud.

I find Zscaler to be very stable.

It's very scalable because it's the cloud version. We have 100,000 users across all levels.

I would give technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

We previously used Westcon-Comstor, which was on-premises, but with Zscaler, we moved to the cloud solution.

The initial setup was pretty easy. The deployment took about three months.

Our team of two members along with Zscaler's team implemented the solution.

We have seen an ROI. This is a well published product, and you get value for your money.

Because it's a cloud solution, we pay on a yearly basis. It is affordable and includes tech support and all features.

Each use case is different, and you have to evaluate it and take the risk.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Zscaler Internet Access at nine.

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.

Our client is a government client with many different work groups. 

Overall, we're very happy with our product.

The price of the solution could be improved. 

We have been using the solution for two years, since the start of COVID. 

We have had no concerns with the solution's stability so far.

The solution is scalable, we have around 70,000 total users across various environments.

They've been very good, though as we are still assessing the solution you would expect them to be very good.

We also use Cisco Umbrella and we tend to use that more. 

The initial setup wasn't easy in our case, as we have thousands of users spread across different environments. Due to our extensive requirements, initial setup is never going to be easy.

We have found the solution to be expensive. 

We use other similar products and find them to be a bit more preferable to Zscaler. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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.

I used Zscaler Internet Access for our proxy web traffic.

One Stop solution for roaming users, single control center for User access, security and performance improvement for Ms sites.

The most valuable features of Zscaler Internet Access are it's on the cloud, high network performance, and the interception of users is very easy.

Zscaler Internet Access can improve by having more option for filtering policy which is currently only ip based (location policy). The developer need to add more option like identifying DNS and Domains names as well along with ip.

I have been using Zscaler Internet Access for one year.

Zscaler Internet Access is stable. Since we have been using it we have not had any problems. 

Zscaler Internet Access is scalable but it depends on the licensing model you choose. It can scale very easily.

We have approximately 1,800 users using the solution in my company. Everyone in the company is using the solution, from receptionist to corporate employees.

In our experience, Please bare some thoughts for experienced guys in the industry.

I do understand 1-2 years experience guys can do Professional service but when you are customer facing, please: Zscaler need to have strong experience guys during customer interaction.

I rate the support from Zscaler Internet Access a three out of five.

Positive

Not disclosing

The initial setup of Zscaler Internet Access is very simple. The cloud configuration is very easy. The implementation took approximately three months due to Change process, however you can finish in 3 days if you are in small size industry.

Wee had excellent support form vendor but it was done mutually along with inhouse design guide.

Absolutely on the money, look at the security dashboard, its easily noticeable.

The price of Zscaler Internet Access should improve, it is expensive.

but to catch small/medium size business they need to come up with some better licensing plan.

yes, Umbrella, Forcepoint

I rate Zscaler Internet Access a nine out of ten. Love the product.

Zscaler Internet Access is used for internet access, security related to internet access, and in some cases, connecting to online applications.

The most valuable features I found in Zscaler Internet Access are the restriction of users for a particular URL, the security feature related to stopping DDoS, and the VPN.

What could be improved in Zscaler Internet Access is its price. It could be cheaper.

I'm working for TCS, which is a service management company, so we manage services for our clients. From my perspective, I've been working with Zscaler Internet Access for six months, but the client could be using it longer than that period. In my case, I've been working with this particular client on Zscaler Internet Access for six months. My company TCS is a partner of Zscaler.

Zscaler Internet Access is quite stable.

I have not had any issues with the scalability of Zscaler Internet Access. I have not encountered scalability issues, but my company has not scaled up that much to encounter problems with scalability, so I can't really comment on how scalable the solution is.

Zscaler Internet Access has good technical support. We have not had an issue where multiple escalations were needed from the support team. The issues were normally quite straightforward and were able to be sorted out with minimum intervention. Whatever support we have requested from Zscaler, we had a very good experience.

The initial setup for Zscaler Internet Access is straightforward. On a scale of one to five, with one being the worst and five being the best, I'm rating my experience with its setup a four.

The pricing for Zscaler Internet Access could be made cheaper.

My advice for people looking into implementing Zscaler Internet Access is that it's quite stable. Its features are quite mature, so I would recommend for people to go for the implementation of the solution.

Zscaler Internet Access is deployed on the cloud, particularly on Zcaler's cloud: the ZIA. It's a SaaS solution.

Because some of our employees need to work remotely, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we were looking for a solution that would keep them safe. We have a Cisco ASA firewall in our company, but when people work remotely they can't be protected by that solution. That's why we decided to go for a WAF.

Zscaler has helped protect our employees wherever they are working, by delivering safe web access. We are doing the same things that we were always doing at our company, and in the same way, but now we are functioning safely outside of our premises. We were already able to work remotely using the Cisco agent, but the Zscaler agent is an improvement at the cybersecurity level.

Another benefit is that we are not managing all the backend infrastructure and that saves 10 to 15 percent of our time in terms of productivity.

It has also reduced the time we spend managing security policies. That's very important because it means that our engineer can spend time focusing on other business activities. The solution is saving 15 to 20 percent of our engineer's time, per day.

Some of the most valuable features are that, as a remote solution it is 

• lightweight
• very easy to set up and configure
• the protection is in the cloud. 

We are agnostic when it comes to what they are doing. We don't have to buy equipment to use it. And when our engineers set it up on our side, we just configured a few settings and we were in.

I would like to see more training and video documentation.

I've been using Zscaler Internet Access for about two months.

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues so far.

The scalability is also very good. We have about 300 users. We gradually want to move all 800 people in our operation over to Zscaler and to remove the local solution.

The technical support we get from them is great. The guys know what they're doing.

Positive

With our legacy system, a VPN solution from Cisco called AnyConnect, we have to buy licenses and equipment, as well as storage in a data center. With this cloud solution, we just pay a fee and it's easy to use. Digital transformation is very important to us because it is a corporate objective. We started with Microsoft 360, and Zscaler is another brick in the wall, in that direction.

We are planning to downgrade our firewall and just keep Zscaler. We're not going to save money with Zscaler, but we are aligning with the corporate objectives by using it.

It's easy to set up. It took my network engineer about one week to prepare the environment, and our software network engineer is the person in charge of keeping it going.

We had a local provider, SISAP, help us. They are a business based in Guatemala, with an office here in Honduras. They worked very well.

The price is competitive. It's not cheap and it's not expensive.

We looked at Cisco Umbrella as an option. But because our organization is part of a corporation that was already using Zscaler, we're aligning ourselves with our headquarters' implementation by going with this solution.

Zscaler is a great solution. We have a very good representative here in Honduras and it was easy to set up. It's a very strong solution with the cloud infrastructure that meets our needs and most of the needs of our users. We are very happy with the solution.