Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

The protection is most valuable.

The interface for administration could be better. They should upgrade the management portal.

Their support could also be better.

We have probably been using this solution for about three years. We are using its latest version. 

Its stability is reasonable. We've had a couple of outages, but overall, it has been okay.

Its scalability is fine.

It could be better.

It was probably in the middle in terms of complexity. Bits of it were easy, and bits of it were more complicated than we envisaged. I would rate it a three out of five in terms of the setup.

Its implementation probably took several weeks. It is deployed on-premises as well as on a public cloud.

We had involved a third party. It was a bit of a mix.

For the maintenance, there are about three people.

It is quite expensive. It does its job, but it is quite expensive for what we need.

Understand your use case and be sure of your technical ability to implement the policies.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

The primary use for the solution is to provide better more mature security for our client's networks.

The solution offers a level of quality of operation and services for each site. By deploying this service we reduce the overall variational risk.

The solution offers a distributed organization to master and to control all of the endpoints. Zscaler allows us to deploy their solution instead of building an in-house proprietary solution. Because it is well integrated and mature, it's faster, cheaper, and better for the company.

Zscaler should provide adjacent services, which would be complementary to their current offering that could to be more pragmatic for a customer. For example, if you take Akamai, you get multiple sets of services, all depending on the customer and the strategy and the complexity and the problems. In some areas, they are more varied in terms of coverage. For example, they also offer content delivery networks, which is complimentary, and for some customers that could solve two problems at once. By providing a wider range of services, Zscaler could reduce deployment risk and operational risk by being a one-stop-shop type of solution.

In the next release, Zscaler should offer a content delivery network.

The solution is scalable. Right now, the company has 40,000 users. The client intends to increase usage.

The initial setup that I'm aware of was not very smooth. I would not blame the product. It was more of the global maturity of the organization we were implementing for. If the organization is not able to align their team, the deployment will be difficult. This deployment is ongoing. We started it four months ago.

We consult on the implementation.

I'm currently consulting clients, and have worked with this solution extensively in the past. Most of my clients are moving from a private cloud to a hybrid cloud deployment model.

The way Zscaler has shaped their product is very good. Now they need to expand the coverage and to have a more global service. For mid-players and sometimes top-players, multiplying the numbers of providers to build an integrated solution is a complex endeavor. If Zscaler expanded their services, that would remove some complexity,

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

Zscaler is securing entire cooperate traffic using its different modules. This includes URL & aapplication filtering, malware & threat protection, bandwidth control, sand boxing and advanced fire-walling etc. Specifically, I like the URL filtering/user authentication. DLP and firewall features are also an added advantages. Also, there are various traffic forwarding mechanisms such GRE, pac file, VPN etc.

Since this is a cloud based product, we don't have to bother about the hardware/physical status and space. No need to monitor and manage the hardware. If there's an issue, Zscaler will switchover to another node to process the customer traffic.

Using location admin users should be better so we can merge any centralized authentication servers like AD, Radius, and any other server. This would help centralize the server management. v5.2 is being released shortly, and will have a lot of new features for TLS and HTTPS transactions.

Morethan 6 years

NO

Initially there were issues interms of stability and improved a lot now.

Zscaler is very easy to scale.

They have very excellent support team

It's an excellent product, and there's no need to worry about the hardware and maintenance cost.

We can manage our IT rules and policies using online portal.

Our primary use case of this solution is for the protection from malware and malicious attacks. We also use it for bandwidth control to compare business and individual use. We use it in conjunction with Palo Alto. 

The most valuable feature is bandwidth control. It has good traffic visibility. 

The implementation process needs improvement. Even if you have implemented it, it doesn't mean that it is done, you have to pay for the service afterward. It's not a one-shot implementation, you need to spend some more effort on it afterward.

It also needs better integration with other applications as well. There are some restrictions.

I would like to see them incorporate a user ID or application ID in the next release of this solution. 

Since you need to maintain it the maintenance payout is not that good. I cannot say that it's stable.

In my company, we have around five thousand users, but just the main account would be around three thousand. 

It works every day and it's protecting against the attacks and so we are using on a daily basis.

I would rate their technical a four out of five, based on my experience with some support cases. Their support is good. 

The initial setup was okay but the problem is that afterward, you have to put in more time and money. 

We used a consultant for the deployment. 

It's not an expensive solution but it is more expensive than some of its competitors. The licensing model is good if you pay for the medium-level licensing model. We get many features with the license but if you would like to integrate with other things, you have to spend time and money for the maintenance but other than that you don't have to buy additional new licenses. 

It was also one of four other products I believe but the Zscaler I can say that for bandwidth control, it is good, so we are not using at the moment data loss prevention feature so I cannot comment on that, but I believe, when you use Zscaler, you are not protected from all malware and malicious attacks, so you may need another tool just to cover these gaps. Zscaler is not enough for advanced protection. You need an additional tool.

Bandwidth control, reporting, and visibility are good but the cloud-based and the advanced protection aren't so great so I would give it a six out of ten.