Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its collaboration with applications without compromising security. The solution needs to improve native security, seamless protection, and user experience. Users should be able to access the solution anytime, and it should be made easy to install and easy to understand. Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its customization.
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.
Lead Information Technology Specialist at ZF Group
Real User
Top 20
2023-09-28T10:51:22Z
Sep 28, 2023
It has a limitation, if you are creating a rule or something for a web application or something, you could only add five users, not more than that. Five or four users are only included in a rule. If you want to create a rule for more than five or four users, you have to go through other methods, not particularly with the application. Working within the application with this method would be quite easy as compared to listing a URL or a normal IP address.
We faced certain migration and implementation challenges in executing the tasks, so I would suggest improvement related to the stability of the solution. It would be beneficial to ensure a smooth transition with no to minimal interruption of the operation.
The area that requires improvement is their support. The current support is lacking. Other than that, once you have the right people on the phone, the product performs as advertised. However, multiple clients have complained about the support.
Learn what your peers think about Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
Network Administrator at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
Real User
Top 10
2023-05-30T12:52:00Z
May 30, 2023
The menu for the ZIA portal could be organized a little bit differently. The most-used modules should be at the top of the menus, not somewhere near the bottom, some of them are not organized well in my opinion.
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.
Network Analyst II at a consumer goods company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
2022-08-19T13:23:00Z
Aug 19, 2022
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.
Infrastructure and Network Engineer at Servomex Group Limited
Real User
2021-02-04T11:11:04Z
Feb 4, 2021
It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best.
Senior Security Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2020-07-16T06:21:07Z
Jul 16, 2020
Due to the fact that it's a multi-tenant hosted environment, it should be noted that other solutions, like Palo Alto, are single-tenant solutions. It's the customer that's hosting it, it's a single tenant. Zscaler hosts a SaaS solution and a multi-tenant, not a single-tenant environment. It would be nice if they offered that as well. This is where probably Zscaler can differentiate itself. There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors. These things only come up when you're talking to enterprise customers who are really looking at those things. For smaller to mid-sized customers, Zscaler makes more sense. These things make it cheaper and more efficient, as well, for Zscaler.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform acts as a VPN alternative for secure remote access, cloud protection, and zero-trust strategies. It enables secure data transmission, supports remote work, and enhances compliance through a cloud-based architecture, offering improved performance and simplified management.Designed for organizations seeking secure application access and robust data protection, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform delivers a comprehensive solution through seamless VPN...
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its collaboration with applications without compromising security. The solution needs to improve native security, seamless protection, and user experience. Users should be able to access the solution anytime, and it should be made easy to install and easy to understand. Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its customization.
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.
It has a limitation, if you are creating a rule or something for a web application or something, you could only add five users, not more than that. Five or four users are only included in a rule. If you want to create a rule for more than five or four users, you have to go through other methods, not particularly with the application. Working within the application with this method would be quite easy as compared to listing a URL or a normal IP address.
We faced certain migration and implementation challenges in executing the tasks, so I would suggest improvement related to the stability of the solution. It would be beneficial to ensure a smooth transition with no to minimal interruption of the operation.
The area that requires improvement is their support. The current support is lacking. Other than that, once you have the right people on the phone, the product performs as advertised. However, multiple clients have complained about the support.
The menu for the ZIA portal could be organized a little bit differently. The most-used modules should be at the top of the menus, not somewhere near the bottom, some of them are not organized well in my opinion.
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.
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.
An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration.
The interface needs a bit of work. It could be a little more streamlined and more intuitive.
It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best.
Due to the fact that it's a multi-tenant hosted environment, it should be noted that other solutions, like Palo Alto, are single-tenant solutions. It's the customer that's hosting it, it's a single tenant. Zscaler hosts a SaaS solution and a multi-tenant, not a single-tenant environment. It would be nice if they offered that as well. This is where probably Zscaler can differentiate itself. There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors. These things only come up when you're talking to enterprise customers who are really looking at those things. For smaller to mid-sized customers, Zscaler makes more sense. These things make it cheaper and more efficient, as well, for Zscaler.