Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform Reviews

I use Zscaler Cloud DLP for its DLP features. It gives you all the basic features such as keywords, regular expressions, data identifiers, etc., but the only difference is that you can only apply the DLP policies to web traffic.

Zscaler Cloud DLP provides you with basic DLP features that you get out of the box such as keywords, regular expressions, and data identifiers, for example, your social security numbers, and credit card numbers, with everything built into the product, so you can directly use those features within the policies. You don't need to create it from scratch, and to me, this is the biggest benefit of Zscaler Cloud DLP. You have a lot of templates to choose from in the solution, rather than having to create templates from scratch or reinvent templates.

The only issue with Zscaler Cloud DLP is that it only gives you DLP protection from web traffic, which is flowing out, while a full-blown DLP solution such as Forcepoint or Symantec gives you DLP coverage for multiple channels.

Zscaler Cloud DLP doesn't give you coverage for email, fax, and USB channels, and this is the only challenge or room for improvement in the solution. It's just an extension on top of what you're buying on the proxy, so it's just an added layer, and it doesn't cover DLP on a very broad level.

I'm unsure if Zcaler is in the business of competing with a full-blown DLP solution, and if there's a plan to expand the features of Zscaler Cloud DLP beyond the web channel because you'll have to deploy a full-blown agent for it. I'm unsure if this is on the cards because the solution is just an added layer that you get with your proxy. I've asked the Zcaler team whether there's a plan to go full DLP in the future, but I didn't get a positive response.

There isn't any feature I'd like added to Zscaler Cloud DLP currently, because anything you could think of that should be in cloud or SaaS solutions is already there, except for machine learning, as it's the only functionality that seems to be lacking in the solution. Machine learning is an additional policy available in other DLP solutions in the market, but my team didn't find it in Zscaler Cloud DLP.

I've been working with Zscaler Cloud DLP for a year and a half.

Zscaler Cloud DLP is a very stable product. My team had very, very few complaints about it, and I never had a situation where an end user would come to me and complain about performance or latency issues with Zscaler Cloud DLP.

Zscaler Cloud DLP is a scalable product.

We've never contacted the Zscaler Cloud DLP technical support team because it's a very straightforward product, so we didn't need help or raised cases about it.

The initial setup for Zscaler Cloud DLP was very straightforward because the portal walks you through it, and you get initial help for a few hours from Zcaler professionals who help you and walk you through the entire setup process.  The team understands what your needs are and give you the best possible suggestions on how to use Zscaler Cloud DLP, how to administer it, and how to maintain it, so that's all good.

The licensing model for Zscaler Cloud DLP allows you to only buy what you need. You don't need to buy it as a whole, so it's good.

I evaluated Forcepoint and Symantec DLP solutions, and both are equally good.

I'm still working with Zscaler Cloud DLP.

Zscaler Cloud DLP is not difficult to maintain, and maintaining it is the vendor's responsibility, so you don't need to worry about it.

I would recommend Zscaler Cloud DLP to others because it's the best proxy product in the market at the moment.

Zscaler Cloud DLP is a pretty good product. It's just missing one or two features, so I would rate it as eight out of ten.

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.

I use the solution primarily for security purposes. We are blocking other sites which are not SSL in our Indian organization.

We are refusing authorization for users to access unauthorized sites. We are blocking through Zscaler. It’s for web filtering.

Many of us are working from home, and we are still able to do the filtering of websites for our workers, wherever they are.

I like the web filtering capabilities. Those are very good.

It offers sound internet security notifications.

There aren’t too many bugs, and it is easy to debug when necessary.

There are good Outlook features available.

It is stable.

The scalability has been good.

I like the user interface.

I’m not sure if any features are lacking. I’m mostly happy with it. That said, I’m not familiar with every area of the product. I need to study it a bit more.

Sometimes applications crash on some machines, and we’d like Zscaler to give us some information as to why that may have happened. We’d like more detailed reports.

We’ve been using the solution for two or three years.

It’s a stable product right now. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn’t crash or freeze. It’s reliable.

It’s scalable. We can add to it. It’s easy to expand.

We have 3,000 to 5,000 users on the solution currently. It’s basically used by everyone in the organization.

I wasn’t a part of the initial setup. I can’t speak to how it went or if it was easy or hard.

I’m a consultant. However, I’m just an end-user of the solution.

I’d give the solution a ten out of ten. It is working fine for us.

Zscaler Private Access is mainly used for connecting to my company network through a VPN. It's used for remote work.

What I find most valuable in Zscaler Private Access is that it's a VPN. Its connectivity as a VPN is its most valuable feature.

What could be improved in Zscaler Private Access is its notification. For example, if there's a speed issue, there should be a pop-up that alerts the user about it. If there is a network quality issue, for example, it isn't good enough to connect to, or the network quality is bad, there should be a notification from the solution.

Zscaler Private Access also needs improvement in terms of its interface and security.

I've been using Zscaler Private Access for more than two years now.

Zscaler Private Access is a stable product.

In terms of the technical support for Zscaler Private Access, I didn't need any support yet, and I haven't spoken with the support team, so I can't rate them for now. I also have not heard anything about support from my colleagues or the IT team.

I haven't used other VPN solutions apart from Zscaler Private Access.

The initial setup for Zscaler Private Access was easy. It was a hassle-free setup. It took just a few minutes and I didn't even notice when the IT team installed it.

Zscaler Private Access was implemented in-house. It was done by our IT team.

Pricing for Zscaler Private Access is moderate. It's acceptable, though I can't give you the exact price currently. It's not too expensive, and on a scale of one to five, I would rate it a four out of five in terms of pricing.

I'm using Zscaler Private Access daily for eight to twelve hours.

More than five thousand people use the solution in my company.

I would rate Zscaler Private Access eight out of ten. Other products are more efficient and better than Zscaler Private Access, particularly in terms of interface and security, so I'm unable to give the solution a perfect score.

I don't know if my company is a partner of Zscaler Private Access, but I'm sure that it is a customer.

With Private Access, from TCS, we used to support multiple customers. Some of our customers will be utilizing Private Access and we'll be supporting them. 

Mainly due to the COVID pandemic situation, many people now work from home. When working from home they needed better connectivity for a VPN solution. That is the main criteria and customers are looking for a stable solution, a cloud-based solution, which can be integrated quickly and can be managed centrally. That is the driving point. The pandemic situation was the driver, as clients needed to add capacity also. Earlier, they would give this remote access solution only to a few people. Now nearly 90% of people work from home. The capacity has to be increased. For that, clients were looking for a multi-net solution and they started deploying Private Access.

The VPN is great for the stability on offer and for the cloud updates and insights you can get. We can protect the application well. There's no need to broadcast my network. Only the application will be visible, those kinds of things are very salient features.

The pricing is good as far as I know, although I don't have an idea of the exact pricing.

It offers great user-friendliness.

We like the customization capabilities.

It's straightforward to set up.

The scalability is good.

So far, we are happy with the solution. I can't speak to any missing features. Based on the customer feedback, they're doing good. We don't see any negative point at this point in time.

I've been using this solution for nearly three or four years. Some of our clients just started using the solution for one year.

The solution is scalable and expands well. 

I don't directly deal with technical support. 

Earlier, we used to stick with on-prem solutions, and compared to on-prem, we are leveraging all the cloud benefits. With this product, the updates and signatures will be there, live updates will be there, et cetera. We don't have to worry about all those updates from a Private Access point of view. From a security perspective, you're adding a lot of security to the VPN solution. Everything is fine.

I'm not involved in the initial setup. My job is to recommend the solution and another team will be doing the setup. We're a larger organization, so there are different teams that work with customers and provide solutions.

That said, my understanding is that the initial setup is very straightforward. 

The client needs to be deployed to the user machine. That typically is done with the Active Directory integration. If you are going to deploy it for multiple people, we need to deploy it, we need to push it using AD group policy or any other software distribution.  Other than that, it is easy only to deploy. We don't see much difficulty.

If we win that proposal, definitely our team will be involved in helping with the setup. 

I cannot speak to the exact licensing costs. 

We don't see any other, private, cloud-based VPN solution. There might be others, like Prisma, and there are so many solutions also coming out. Other than that, we are ready to explore new products. However, so far, whatever we have used within the Zscaler solution is doing good.

I work for a consultancy. My customers are manufacturing customers.

We recommend the solution to customers looking for a kind of non-cloud-based VPN solution.

Typically we will use the latest version of the solution. 

While there are so many customers still having on-premise solutions, we would definitely suggest cloud-based solutions and Zscaler would be in the top three we would recommend.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I mainly use SASE for proxy and content filtering.

SASE's most valuable features are proxy and content filtering.

An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration.

I've been using Zscaler SASE for two to three years.

SASE is stable.

SASE is scalable if users need to increase the network it supports - it's quite transparent from the end-user perspective.

Zscaler's technical support is quite good.

Positive

The initial setup is fairly straightforward.

I would advise those thinking of implementing SASE to ensure that their technical requirements are well-established and that the transition process is understood. I would give SASE a rating of nine out of ten.

The use case is employing data, PII, and even HIPAA. I do public sector work for hospitals, counties, and local governments.

I am using the latest version of Zscaler Cloud DLP. I'm a licensed installer—a subcontractor. I do a lot of installs for different companies and retailers, and one company that I do in Salesforce. There are probably 20 or 30 instances of it that I'm actively involved in at any given moment.

The solution is deployed on Zscaler's private cloud.

It's one of the easier products on the market as far as set-ups and deployments. Even across their whole product suite, they've made it pretty simple.

The infrastructure supporting it can vary: GCP, Azure, and AWS.

It really comes down to the Regex that's being used from Zscaler's DLP. That's the one area that we find technical limitations because the rest of the industries use an RE2, and Regex and Zscaler just aren't there. It's not because of the technology and they can't code it. It's because of the cost of these actual Regex strings from a query perspective. There's limited flexibility from a Regex perspective as far as data matching and expanding your DLP dictionaries and libraries.

In the next release, I would like to see RE2 Regex supported.

I have been using this solution for almost two years. We are an authorized seller.

Setup is simple.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

My advice is to ensure that the solution meets your DLP use cases. I find that for 99% of the companies that are going to purchase this Cloud DLP, it has to fit their use cases. It's going to get into the Fortune 50s and the companies that are more security conscious and that are doing extremely complex DLP policies. Those folks will likely have some issues. It's not going to be a straight, "Hey, these are the DLP rules I have today. I want to move these over to Zscaler." 

That's one area where I think customers should do their own investigation and ensure that it fits their use cases before they jump in and purchase the product and then find out that maybe 25% of their DLP rules are too complex to be migrating.

The tool is a proxy service that provides inspection of URL filtering for internet access. We have probably 20 or 30 different vendors that we work with in regards to carriers. These are all providers that we use that work in conjunction with that platform. It's an agent that's installed on all of our endpoints. We whitelist and blacklist and we allow certain websites, et cetera, using this product.

Overall, the solution does a pretty good job at web filtering.

The solution does a good job of allowing us to choose what to whitelist and blacklist.

The agent easily installs on the endpoints.

The solution needs to offer better scalability.

The product needs SAML integration. That's something they should work to add in future releases.

It needs to offer SSO, single sign-on, and items of that nature.

The product needs greater zero-trust. They need to focus more on zero-trust relationships.

I have been using the solution for about three and a half years at this point. It's been a while. 

The scalability is a weak point right now. Its scaling capabilities are lacking, and we'd like to see that improve in the future.

The solution is basically an agent that is installed on endpoints in order to provide security. It's not overly complicated.

We are not using the latest version of the solution. Currently, for example, we are one version back on that, as we don't typically do the most current version.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've, for the most part, been quite happy with its capabilities and the level of security it provides to us.