Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform Reviews

Zscaler is a cloud proxy that scans and provides security for traffic to cloud-based applications and resources.

Zscaler is location-independent. Even if you switch to another country, users will have the same security posture. For example, if you are in one country and travel to India tomorrow, you will still have the same security posture as the rest of your team. You will also be able to access all your resources over the Internet as a team, regardless of location. There is no dependency on local firewalls at the site. Everything is in the cloud, so you get security wherever you go.

Zscaler provides several security features, including encryption, URL filtering, application control, and credential theft protection. They are also updating their DLP capabilities.

The reports can be made easier. The solution takes time to fetch reports in the Database section. Otherwise, the reporting module itself is well-designed.

I have been using Zscaler SASE for two and a half years.

Zscaler is very stable. The customers use web services that cause issues over the internet.

Zscaler is highly scalable. Zscaler is a cloud-based service, so it takes care of all the data center and hardware infrastructure. Even if you only have one license, you will still have access to all of Zscaler's security features and performance capabilities. Around 2Lakh users are in Nestle, and all are using Zscaler.

We work with enterprise-level customers.

The customer support is good.

Positive

I have experience with Prisma Access. In terms of scalability and tech support, Zscaler is better. However, Prisma is better in other parameters because they have more experience in the firewall industry and are the leader in firewall technology. We at Nestle are forwarding most of our traffic to Zscaler for scalability. We are using Prisma for some essential functions.

The initial setup is easy. You have to plan very carefully how you are going to use Zscaler. Planning is critical, but implementation is achievable. You need to purchase cloud or host services and synchronize your user database to the rescheduler. Then, you just need to use the application to create a folder application on the system, and you are good to go.

Zscaler deployment time depends on the number of users and the policies to be deployed. A very simple setup can take around two to three weeks, while a very complex setup with multiple components can take months to implement.

We are the service providers of Nestle, which is a user of Zscaler. 

New functionality is always being added to Zscaler's products, but there are some features that we cannot have in the cloud-based platform. For example, Pulse QoS and VPN are still available as standalone products. However, Zscaler offers a variety of products that can meet these needs, such as ZIA, ZPA, and ZDA.

Maintaining Zscaler is easy. It has a well-designed admin portal and policy control. At least 20-30 people are required to manage the Zscaler product with a worldwide presence, depending on the setup. For example, Nestle requires 1-2 people to manage their Zscaler deployment.

I recommend the Zscaler solution. If I get an opportunity to use it in an environment where the users are mostly roaming users and the entire network stack is in the cloud, I will recommend they use Zscaler products. It's a great product.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It pretty much covers, like, if you implement it, it's going to cover, like, 80 to 90% of real estate for the organization.

On DLP terms, Zscaler Cloud DLP ensures that data doesn't go outside of the organization. So on the network level, Zscaler does a pretty good job.

The solution doesn't do a very good job of detection, but they definitely do a very good job of implementing the policies.

There is room for improvement in detection. From the detection perspective, like, how it detects the violations.

Another area of improvement is implementation through non-client connectors. The solution can be implemented in two ways. One uses the back file; the other one uses client connectors. So the client connector is pretty fast, but when it comes to non-client connectors and procedures, it's kind of delayed and slow. The policies don't reflect very soon. It takes, like, a day and, like, hours to get implemented. But if it's a client connector, it takes, like, two minutes. It's just so good.

In future releases, I would like to see two things. It's not more of a feature but more like an enhancement. So I would like to see an enhancement in their proximity when detecting credit card details and past support details, and PII data.

Another area of improvement is support. 

I have been using this solution for around nine months. I use the latest version 6.2.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

Scalability is pretty good. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

There is room for improvement in support. 

Neutral

The initial deployment is pretty easy. That's pretty straightforward.

We have definitely seen an ROI. 

The price is a little bit on the higher side, especially if you are going to add, like, packs or bundles to your subscription. But otherwise, it's pretty decent.

I would suggest to keep your policies simple. Don't complicate them because it depends on your organization and how you set it up. So once you are doing it, just keep it clean and simple.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

The primary use case of SASE is for secure access, whether for public internet or private applications. Post-Covid, users are connecting from everywhere and need secure access with a good user experience. We deploy this solution to our customers. 

Safe access is a key valuable feature. The ability to secure data in terms of confidentiality is also a great feature. Instead of going through existing gateways or their networks, users get direct secure access to applications over the internet. Connectivity to the applications is also great.

Although it's good, the DX layer could be better if it had improved visibility. There is definitely scope to enhance that aspect. Some customers are looking for application connectivity over zero trust which is a concern for them. I believe it's in the Zscaler roadmap and we hope to see that in the near future. 

I've been providing this solution to our customers for a decade. 

There were initially some stability issues but the solution is now very stable.

The scalability is great and it's the biggest advantage of having any SaaS solution. We have all categories of customers and a mid-market enterprise board. Our client companies have users that range anywhere from 500 up to 5,000. 

The initial setup is not complex at all and easy to handle. Customers have to familiarize themselves with the solution and try it out themselves. Deployment usually takes a couple of weeks although it depends on use cases and complexity. There may also be dependencies from the network side which can add to the deployment time.

We use Zscaler Private Access to provide access to on-premise applications.

The most valuable feature of Zscaler Private Access is we do not have to connect to a VPN, it is seamless. It is more convenient for us because we use one agent to cover the internet and VPN access.

Zscaler Private Access could improve by improving external access. If external parties want to access locally to my company's services, we need to onboard them into our domain, otherwise, it doesn't work. Additionally, if their company also has Zscaler Private Access, then it doesn't work. They need to log in with our domain ID, not their company ID.

I have been using Zscaler Private Access for approximately one and a half years.

The stability of Zscaler Private Access is good.

I rate the stability of Zscaler Private Access a five out of five.

Zscaler Private Access is scalable.

I rate the scalability of Zscaler Private Access a five out of five.

We have approximately 300 users using this solution.

I have not used the support from Zscaler Private Access.

I use FortiClient VPN in parallel with Zscaler Private Access.

Zscaler Private Access's initial setup was simple. The total time for the implementation took one hour.

We did the implementation of Zscaler Private Access with one person.

I rate Zscaler Private Access an eight out of ten.

We use Zscaler Cloud DLP to maintain data load and for storage reports. 

The solution is the best for storage. 

We have issues with the tool's maintenance and networking. It should be able to work in offline mode as well. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

Zscaler Cloud DLP is stable. 

The tool is scalable. My company has 250-300 users. 

Zscaler Cloud DLP's installation is difficult. 

Zscaler Cloud DLP is moderately priced. We pay around 2 million rupees per year. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

The security issues one faces with legacy VPN solutions are addressed using a SaaS VPN platform. If an organization wants to implement a zero-trust network architecture, then a SaaS VPN platform is the way to go about it.

The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are its ability to integrate with multiple IDPs and application segmentation.

More on-prem infrastructure is required when Zscaler Private Access is to be implemented as a single point of entry.

Since the whole concept of app segmentation is license based, making the app segmentation extremely granular becomes very expensive for an organization. As a result, not all organizations would adopt a granular approach for rolling out their Zscaler Private Access solution. So the entire approach must be seen differently, not the standard license-based approach. As an organization, if I want to make the access for my employees more granular, then it means that I will have to buy more licenses. Organizations with 10,000 to 20,000 applications, including their business partners also connecting to their applications, would need to invest a lot of money into making it granular. Okay. That kind of investment may not be viable for every organization to make, which could limit the use of Zscaler Private Access.

I have been using Zscaler Private Access for about two and a half years.

I rate Zscaler Private Access a nine out of ten for stability.

I rate Zscaler Private Access a ten out of ten for scalability. Zscaler Private Access can be used for more than 2,00,000 users.

Zscaler tells you right at the front that the implementation needs to be taken up by Zscaler-certified people. It does require a good amount of knowledge of the platform. Other options are available where Zscaler makes professional services and resident engineers available. So Zscaler Private Access is a complicated solution, but they facilitate much of that implementation. I rate Zscaler Private Access a seven out of ten for ease of initial setup.

Zscaler Private Access's deployment depends on how much time an organization spends preparing for the solution's implementation. If you have a checklist prepared beforehand, you can deploy the solution in probably one and a half or two months. But if you start deploying it and then start making the necessary preparations for the change, it could easily take more than a year for a large organization.

To deploy Zscaler Private Access, you need to follow a full-fledged project management process. This process includes requirement definitions, coming up with a high-level design document, preparing your project plan, coming up with a low-level design document, going into a pilot phase, and then the production rollout.

Zscaler Private Access is extremely expensive. I rate Zscaler Private Access an eight out of ten for pricing.

Zscaler Private Access has its own data centers and its own private cloud.

Overall, I rate Zscaler Private Access a seven out of ten.

I've focused on basic Zscaler Private Access policies, primarily when users are working remotely.

I also use the solution for browser access, which means giving access to clientless machines.

Privileged remote access is another use case for Zscaler Private Access.

I also use the solution for its log streaming service and source IP anchoring.

I find all Zscaler Private Access features valuable because each replaces flawed technologies, such as EPAs being replacements for VPN and PR as a replacement for PAM, so I can't mention only one valuable feature. Overall, Zscaler Private Access is a good solution.

Everything looks good in Zscaler Private Access, but the issue my team faced with it was the inability to find subscriptions on the portal. That caused some difficulties, so it would be better if the Zscaler team made it easier for people to find subscriptions on the portal, mainly information on what my customers subscribed to or the type of licenses purchased.

I've been working with Zscaler Private Access for one year.

Zscaler Private Access is pretty stable.

Zscaler Private Access is a scalable solution.

Primarily for Zscaler Private Access, I only require ten percent technical support if the architecture is complex or if there is some restriction while reading the logs. I've contacted the technical support team, and I didn't face any issues with support.

I used Symantec before using Zscaler Private Access, and I switched from Symantec to Zscaler because my company switched.

Zscaler Private Access can be complex because you first need to understand how application segments work. You'll also need to understand server service, app connector groups, and deploying an app connector. The connection between all the components can be confusing, but it's only for first-time deployment, so overall, it is okay. Later on, you only have to troubleshoot the policy side.

Setting up Zscaler Private Access can be confusing.

Deploying the solution could take one day.

I did the deployment for Zscaler Private Access, an in-house deployment.

My company is a Zscaler Private Access partner, so the customers pay for the license fees.

I deployed a project with eight thousand Zscaler Private Access users, but apart from that, I've given support to other projects with fifty thousand users of the solution.

There's no plan to increase the number of users for Zscaler Private Access.

I'd recommend the solution to others.

My rating for Zscaler Private Access is eight out of ten.

We have found that Zscaler SASE is a good product and we use it as a proxy.

Zscaler SASE is probably the number one cloud-based proxy security solution. Just on name recognition alone, I would say that is the main value it is bringing right now.

The management of the product has to be clearly defined or they will conflict. Sometimes you have to add bypass rules allowing specific websites access for internal purposes or for it to completely bypass altogether.  Make sure that it is the same teams who are managing the firewalls and the product. They should all be on the same team. If you have two teams managing it separately, you are going to run into a lot of problems.

I have been using Zscaler SASE for the past three years.

It is very stable. I have never seen it go down, not once, but then again I do not manage that portion specifically.

Zscaler SASE looks to be scalable to me.  We have about seven hundred and fifty using it in the USA and two hundred in Europe.

We were using another product before switching over to Zscaler SASE because it is number one.

It is pretty straightforward and does not create any major challenges. You whitelist specific URLs to either be allowed or to be bypassed.

We do deployment in-house. It is just a click and that is it.

The pricing is expensive and on the higher end. Honestly, in my opinion, it is not worth the price. 

I would rate Zscaler SASE an eight out of ten.