Google Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy Reviews

In our company, we used the solution for virtual machines and for deploying some container platforms on Google Cloud Platform.

Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy is an easy-to-use tool, primarily considering the UI on its website, making it the solution's most valuable feature.

I think that the solution needs to be made available in a local region of every country, especially in countries like Taiwan. The solution to its users should provide more choices in terms of regions.

I have been using Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy for a year.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten since there is a need to increase the training of the solution's users.

Scalability-wise, it is an easy solution to scale up. I rate the solution's scalability a ten out of ten.

There are around 15 users of the solution in my company.

Some other people in my company are in charge of looking into the plans concerning the solution's increase in usage.

I have used Google's technical support, and they have been friendly in their approach.

The solution's initial setup is easy.

The deployment process can be done in a week.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

We did seek help from a consultant with the solution's integration phase.

There is a need to make yearly payments toward the solution's licensing.

Four developers are required for the solution's maintenance.

I recommend the solution to those planning to use it since we ourselves would choose Google Cloud Platform in our company.

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

We use the solution for continuous integration and deployment of applications on databases.

The solution's most valuable features are Google domains, UI setup, easy server access, and intuitive dashboards.

The solution's naming conventions feature needs improvement. We encounter issues while setting up emails as well. They should improve this particular area. Also, they should integrate the solution with more applications.

I have been using the solution for six months.

The solution's stability is good.

We have five solution users in our organization. It is expensive to scale up the solution.

The solution's initial setup was fine. However, it took a lot of work to name the features. The process involves setting up the server, connecting to the gateway, and setting up user access and security codes.

The implementation of the solution was done natively on the platform.

The solution generates a good return on investment.

We pay for the solution’s compute engine every month.

I rate the solution as an eight. I advise others to go through the documentation before deploying it. They can set up a small cluster to practice before implementing it.

We use GCP for many resources, including Google Kubernetes cluster (GK), monitoring with Stackdriver and Work Explorer, Cloud Insight, Cloud Storage for backup, Container Registry, VPC, complete VM, Memory Store, and Redis. We also use Robitankyo and the message query.

For me, the most valuable feature is JKS and Kubernetes Cluster on managed service. Moreover, the latest versions of the managed Kubernetes clusters are good. 

There is room for improvement. For instance, we encountered some issues with a potential cluster on GCP last month. Although we use GCP for all our resources, we experienced some difficulties. So, I think this aspect needs to be addressed and improved upon. And from what I can tell, GCP is working on addressing this issue.

I have been using this solution for two years. 

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability of the solution an eight out of ten. 

We used global IT for the support. 

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

 I'm working with GCP, managing approximately 15 GCP clusters on Kubernetes. I have strong experience with Google Cloud and am a solution architect on AWS.

Our use case is to plug platforms, especially applications that are 
based on website micro services such as containers. 

From our perspective this is a good solution that functions well and has good features. 

We are based in France and it's difficult to find people with sufficient training to assist us. I'd like to see companies with the right level of expertise to help my customers to move their projects from the traditional information system or infrastructures on premise to cloud but it's very difficult to find that here. Google is not well supported in France. 

The initial setup was not so easy. The average deployment time is between one and two years. It requires an initial feasibility study to understand the scope. Once that's established you need to find the path to help set up the right security parameters. The migration is done through scripting and codes. The deployment requires project managers and engineers.

I recommend this solution but it's important to find the right partner and be sure you have a suitable use case. I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

The solution should have better integration. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable.

The technical support is up to par. 

As with AWS, the solution is easy to install. 

50 or 60 days are needed for the deployment. 

Around three or four people are needed for the deployment and maintenance. 

The customer purchases an annually sponsored license. 

We have a maximum of around 20 customers making use of the solution. 

We support Azure, AWS and Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy, depending on the customer's architecture. 

For the most part, I would not recommend the solution to others, as our expertise is more with AWS and Azure.

I rate Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy as an eight out of ten. 

Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy provides more control of our assets because normally when you're using Google Cloud, you have to use your Google email. IAP can control the assets that only come from the dedicated company or IP address.

It's a scalable solution that is easy to install as well.

The support can be more efficient. Google has different layers of support, like layer one, layer two, and layer three, but normally, the response from layer one is not very useful.

Google is not very capable when it comes to patching vulnerabilities. It would be nice if they could improve this security issue or CVE.

The stability needs to be improved for some services.

I've been using it for around five months because I just joined this company.

If you are talking about virtual machines, our customers would say that this solution is not so stable because sometimes Google Cloud has host errors. We haven't been able to get a good explanation from Google regarding this.

If you're using Kubernetes, it's quite stable, but if you are using VM, the system will typically reboot at least once every three months.

It's quite scalable.

If I ranked technical support from one to five, with five being the highest score, I would rank it at around three.

Technical support could be more efficient. Google has different layers of support, like layer one, layer two, and layer three, and the response from layer one is not very useful.

The installation should be easy.

I would recommend this product because with Google Cloud Platform, you can do a lot of applications that you cannot do with AWS. AWS is more useful for developers because it has moved from general usage.

I would rate Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy at six on a scale from one to ten because it still needs some improvements.

I've been using Google virtual machines, Google FUSE. It has many, many products across the entire cloud platform. GCP can be used for data storage and for virtual machine creation.

It has some stack of products in it that I have found quite useful.

The solution is very easy to use. It's easy to navigate and to work with.

It's quite a flexible product.

We've found the solution to be scalable. 

The product is great. I can't think of a way it can be improved. There aren't any missing features. It's quite complete.

The solution could be more reasonably priced. We find it to be a bit expensive right now.

I've been using the solution for about a year or so. It hasn't been very long just yet.

The scalability of the solution is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so with relative ease. It's not hard at all.

I'm not sure how many users in total are on it in our organization. It might be between ten to 20 people or so. There aren't too many people on it currently.

I plan to continue to use it going forward. I can't speak to the company's plans for if it, and that includes increasing usage or not.

I've never had the chance to reach out to technical support, and therefore can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. I cannot evaluate them having had no direct interactions with them.

There isn't really an installation process for this solution. It's on the cloud. You don't need to implement anything. It's all just ready to go.

The solution could be cheaper. Right now, it's a bit expensive.

We've looked at the Oracle Cloud Platform and Amazon AWS and both services are good.

We're always using the latest version of the solution. It's always the latest as we are on the cloud deployment model and it auto-updates.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. Its capabilities have been very good overall and we've been very happy with it.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations. It's worked well for us.

We use it for software social media analytics. That software can call social media like Facebook, Instagram, and news online media. We call them and put them in the container. And then we analyze the data and display it on the dashboard. We use the GCP to run our server production.

We only use what we need to put in the application to create a server. We do not need to maintain the hardware. 

I think this product needs to shift the focus from our software, our solution, like social media analytics to our customers; not maintenance in the hardware. We focus on our business for the maintenance and infrastructure to develop the software. 

I have been using this solution for two years. 

We use it to up the server like the compute engine. For the compute engine, we just put the CPU with what I need, and then storage capacity what I need, and then just click, and it runs. We don't use it yet to have integration with other platforms or systems. 

We don't get any bugs in the software.

We do have plans to increase usage when our client base increases, we will increase the capacity, like the storage and the compute. Maybe in a year or two. 

We used to contact support to handle our problems at the beginning of our implementation. We're not so experienced with the system so we need their guidance. We are satisfied with the support. We have to pay to use technical support. There are a lot of charges. We open the ticket and then have to pay for it. It shouldn't be like that. We use the infrastructure and then we pay. We just input them for the system, we do not have to pay again.

The setup is of medium complexity. It is not too difficult, it is medium level to operate GCP.

It took only two days to set up the server. The server itself took three hours. Three hours to set up the server and then the deployment. We built the system over a long time. But to deploy we set the infrastructure like the server, firewall, in the GCP. It took five hours to deploy.

We deployed it ourselves.  

I would recommend GCP. We will focus to develop our system, our product, and it's a matter of whether or not the infrastructure can handle GCP.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

In the next release, I would like to see a machine learning system.