Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

We use Zscaler as a secure internet proxy. All of the traffic is filtered through it. We have about 3,000 users at the organization. 

All internet traffic goes through Zscaler, which protects the organization's IP, which isn't published publicly. Zscaler's cloud services filter and clear all traffic. 

We like Zscaler's traffic filtering, web security, DLP, and IPS features. The real-time threat protection is excellent.

Zscale is providing a proxy IP, and most government sites will block traffic from a proxy. Also, we see some performance issues on the cloud side during DC failover.

We have used Zscaler for around three years. 

I rate Zscaler seven out of 10 for stability because we are still having some performance issues.

Zscaler technical support is okay. They have the technical knowledge needed to cover the market. 

Deploying Zscaler was moderately difficult. You don't need to create anything. We only needed to forward things to the Zscaler cloud, and they took care of everything on their side. We needed to establish a trusted network and create a channel between Zscaler, the DC, and our on-prem environment. 

Zscaler is more expensive than Fortinet or Palo Alto. It's 10 times more expensive than Fortinet. However, it's worth the price because of the cloud security features, and it gives us a single global control, which is why we chose this.

We also looked at Fortinet. We decided to go with Zscalare because we operate across multiple countries and want centralized control from a single dashboard at our headquarters.

I rate Zscaler Internet Access seven out of 10. We need a solution like this these days because we have remote users who need protection.

Generally, we use the tool for SSE and ZTNA. We offer all the features for cloud security, zero-trust network access, or CASB. Depending on the requirements, we sometimes integrate it with SD-WAN so that we can offer SASE-based services.

The solution's most valuable features are its reliability and availability, measured by the number of ports it offers. Zscaler Internet Access and Zscaler Private Access are also good features of the product. For example, when it comes to the secure web gateway provided by Zscaler, I would say it is a very trustworthy area. The sandboxing or the DLP features can be provisioned on Zscaler, making it the value the tool offers to Zscaler Internet Access users. The tool has good reach across the globe. The number of PoPs the tool has is one of its USPs.

Sometimes, cost is one component that customers complain about, especially if they compare it with some of its competitors. Zscaler's pricing seems to be a bit on the higher side.

I think the pricing model is also something that the tool can probably look into to optimize or improve for the customer so that it can be a competitive tool commercially.

The solution's technical support needs to be improved, especially by offering a better support structure for different geographical areas.

I have been using Zscaler Internet Access for three to four years. My company is a service provider of Zscaler Internet Access.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

The difference between Zscaler Internet Access and similar products can vary and be specific on a case to case basis. Sometimes, the customer says that if they can have a better tool in terms of flexibility when it comes to customization, then it would be good. One of the customers was saying that the SSL inspection is a bit heavy in Zscaler, and I thought that they have big overheads. These are a few things that I remember when it comes to the tool's cons.

The product's initial setup phase is easy.

The product's installation phase requires one to three L2 or L3 engineers who are enough. It will all depend on how many clients you have, how you are pushing the agents to the clients, or how you are integrating it all.

The ease of maintaining the tool will depend on which solution you are comparing it with, so if you compare it with other similar products, I think it is okay. It will all depend on what type of expertise you have on Zscaler platform in comparison with others.

The tool's SSL inspection feature is effective. Many of our customers are comfortable using SSL inspection and find it useful.

Some time back, I faced the challenge of integrating you with my customer's SAP infrastructure, but eventually, it was resolved with some permutations and combinations.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

The main use cases that our clients typically have and why we propose and implement the solution is for a proxy solution. It's designed to create a proxy site-to-site tunnel between the computer trying to access any resources on the Internet or within the offices. Most organizations have a significant number of remote workers - around 30 to 40 percent of their workforce is remote - and they log in from different locations globally, such as Japan, the US, Europe, and Asia. So they need one solution to cover these remote locations and provide a proxy solution.

In addition, we need to have minimum bandwidth latency, and Zscaler is the most suitable product we see. Whenever a customer comes to us with a large geographical spread in terms of their workforce, we propose and implement this solution across the cloud, as required.

One feature that is valuable to me from an implementation point of view is that it's very easy to implement. We just had to route in some IPs, and it automatically hops into the nearest Zscaler nodes, which they call it. They have more than 150 nodes across the globe. Essentially, if I'm trying to access a server in India at this point in time, and the server I'm trying to access is somewhere in Singapore or Tokyo, it creates a lot of internet latency. But with Zscaler, it's not the case because they have a server in almost every major hotspot in the world. In India, if you're connecting, they will automatically route to their nearest server. Since they have servers in so many places in the world, we can easily configure them to the nearest server. 

The end-user who's using it doesn't feel the latency, and it's really minimal, less than three milliseconds, six milliseconds, whereas the competition has more than ten milliseconds and eleven milliseconds as latency.

There are a couple of areas of improvement in the solution. Firstly, there are some performance issues when we add on additional controls. Zscaler Internet Access is a plain vanilla solution that allows you to add CSV or DLP on top of it. However, once you add these modules, the performance degrades for a bit, and the latency increases significantly. We're talking about a two-fold or three-fold increase in latency. They need to work on this. So the performance goes down when using a lot of features simultaneously.

Moreover, the implementation interface is not very good. It has some minor bugs, and it's not properly streamlined. However, these are not software issues that cannot be resolved. A simple reboot or a call to the reseller personnel can guide you in resolving these issues. But the experience can be more seamless if the interface is improved.

I have hands-on experience with Zscaler Internet Access, a cloud proxy solution similar to Cisco's proxy solution.

We've been working with Zscaler Internet Access for almost three years now. We use the basic Zscaler Internet Access with add-ons like CASB and DLP. This is the solution we sell and implement the most.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. I would rate it a ten out of ten. There are more than 15,000 users under different organizations. They are small and medium-sized businesses. The largest organization that deployed Zscaler had 8,000 users. 

The customer service and support team is good. 

Positive

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy. The deployment process is quick, around 6 to 8 weeks. But that depends on the geographical locations we need to cover. If we only need to cover two to three locations, it's good enough.

The deployment process involves building the Zscaler package, which can be vanilla or vanilla plus bundle, and then remotely pushing it to the client machine using Microsoft Intune or whatever it is. Meanwhile, we have to build the configuration and policy based on the client's requirements.

First, what we do is we build the ZScaler package. The package includes the features that will be going through the solution. Once the package is built, it is pushed into the endpoints or machines, such as computers, laptops, and desktops, through Microsoft Intune or SCCM, or any other patching solution that they have. Meanwhile, we configure Zscaler to the nearest hub that the reseller has. They have more than 150 nodes across the globe, so we configure the nearest hub for them. Once that configuration is done, we have established a connection, and the systems have gone online, then you can actually use the solution.

So, it's basically a two-step process. Rolling out the package, rolling out the agent, and configuring the reseller to the nearest hub. That's it. It's a smooth process.

Zscaler is transparent about its pricing model. However, it is not a cheap solution. I would rate the licensing model a seven out of ten. 

My advice, generally, is that if a client has a growth prospect with an increasing number of employees moving across the globe, then Zscaler advises having a product that is scalable and fast. By fast, I mean it has low latency, making it very scalable. Zscaler Internet Access is a completely cloud-based product and is highly scalable. It is a reliable solution to have in your IT stack. 

Overall, I would rate Zscaler an eight out of ten. Zscaler Internet Access is highly scalable and has low latency, making it one of the most reliable products with good market support and presence. I rated it an eight and not a ten because there are a couple of constraints in scaling certain things. For example, some customers, such as federal institutions of the US, state of clutter, or some banks, want an on-premise solution. They want more control because Cloud will always have a security issue somewhere or the other, and Zscaler Internet Access does not have an on-prem solution. Also, when you increase the features, it does lag a bit, which should not happen.

We use ZIA for outbound internet connectivity. The internet traffic of on-prem users will be directed to the ZIA cloud for security checks and web filtering. 

Zscaler does not provide dedicated IPs to each customer. Hence, they share a pool of IPs provided by Zscaler. There is a chance of blacklisting these IPs. I also do not like the multi-management portal. 

I have been working with the product for a couple of years. 

The product's stability is fine. 

ZIA is not scalable due to the limitation of bandwidth. My company has over 100 users for the product. 

ZIA's support is good. 

Positive

ZIA's setup is not easy because of the multiple clouds. 

ZIA follows a subscription model pricing and charges you based on the number of users. I would say its price is good. 

I would rate the product a seven out of ten. I haven't seen any unique competitive advantage for ZIA over its competitors. ZIA's offerings are offered by competitors as well. However, the product has good security features. However, I wouldn't recommend this product to organizations that require high-security features. I would recommend Palo Alto in those cases. 

Our customer already had the product, which they got from another vendor. They were facing some issues with their existing policies. Our role was to optimize the policy. So we optimized Threat Protection, DLP, and CASB policies per the customer’s requirements. In their environment, G Suite was completely allowed for some users, but they wanted only to allow a specific corporate domain. As per the recommendation, CASB policy must have been in place, but it wasn’t. So we optimized the tool as per their requirement and delivered it.

The product has different modules like SWG, CASB, DLP, and Threat Protection. The most valuable feature of the solution is SWG traffic. The product is very good in web traffic.

Cloud App’s database should be improved. Currently, they only support and provide granular controls to around 1000 cloud applications. In Netskope, it is more than 3000. Around 65,000 applications are visible to the users in Netskope, but Zscaler only supports around 3000 to 4000. Cloud App is not good. UI is not as easily understandable as Netskope. Netskope has a source, destination, and action policy. In Zscaler, we have to click multiple tabs to get it. It's a bit tricky compared to Netskope. Once we understand it, it's simple.

I have been using the solution for four to five months.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability an eight out of ten. Currently, the product is facing major issues in scalability because the company is over ten years old. The data center they have in India goes down frequently. VLANs also go down frequently. Due to this, the product gets turned off completely, and sometimes, the users go to different traffic. If it’s an on-prem user, they go via a firewall, which increases the pain for the customers. They have a problem with DC. VLANs go down sometimes. That's why the user faces complete disconnection issues for the proxy. Two people in the organization are using the solution.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is just a plug-and-play process. When the Zscaler client is installed on the machine, it works like a normal proxy. They're connected to the cloud. The solution is deployed on all the users’ machines, and the management and policy creation is done at the cloud level. It's a cloud proxy.

The deployment is just a plug-and-play process. The policy is very simple.

We acquired a customer for optimization. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We can use the solution for users that are working from home. It allows us to manage control over security. We install an agent and can set the domains that are allowed on the network. It helps ensure security.

It can be easily accessed by the cloud. Users can easily work from home while maintaining company security.

The servers are hosted in the cloud, and it maintains security for Azure. It's like having double security - one for the cloud and one for the user.

It is simple to use. We can create multiple tunnels with ease. It's simpler to use than a VPN.

The solution is stable.

We'd like for them to include some sort of antivirus tool. It would help if that came bundled with this product from a security standpoint. 

We'd like to have a server connector without ht need for multiple micro tunnels. 

We just completed a POC. I just started with the company.

The stability is good. The solution is reliable. We've had no issues with stability. I'd rate the stability eight out of ten.

We have almost 300 users.

I'd rate the scalability six out of ten. The policy creation is difficult. It's complicated to add them, and therefore scaling may take a while. 

I don't really deal with technical support. We get support from a third-party vendor, not Zscaler directly.

We have used a different solution in the past. Zscaler, we can deploy on VM servers.

We've only completed a POC and plan to roll out a full implementation soon. In the past, I have implemented it completely as well. We are planning to deploy for the sales users first. 

It's not a difficult process. Once the agent is installed, it needs to be verified with the console. The deployment takes between 30 to 45 days, depending on the level of support needed to complete the task. The issue is our sales team are work from home users. That can make the process longer. 

We also need to create user policies before the full deployment happens. Different policies are needed for different users. We may need to create three to four different policies for different user sets. 

We have a third party that we get the solution. 

We have yet to receive the cost from Zscaler. We've only done a POC. My understanding is the solution is reasonably priced. I'd rate the pricing eight out of ten.

We are an end-user. We may be a future partner.

It is good for a small environment of 80 to 100 users. I'm not sure if it works for very large organizations. This solution requires less maintenance and makes server access easy - instead of, for example, standalone VPN access.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We use the solution for web security services such as DLP, VPN, BPA, ZIA, and CASB.

We needed a solution to control the user traffic on the internet earlier. But now, with Zscaler's help, we can adequately handle the data using CASB. Also, we can control URLs and Web accesses with the help of its web security gateway feature. Along with this, we are controlling the data leak assessment on the internet with DLP's help.

The solution's most valuable feature is the well-structured functioning of services. It allows us to monitor things in the best possible way. It has all the features separated well from each other. For instance, they have a separate portal in case one wants to control anything on the internet. The other valuable feature is its ability to audit the reports well.

They recently improved a few things with the new version. They should enhance the audit reporting feature. They are providing a very basic DLP solution, but it needs improvement. If they improve the DLP solution, it will be a better solution in the future. They should work on the bandwidth of the CASB solution as well. 

We started the solution's POC in October but it is not yet fully deployed.

The solution’s customer service is good.

Positive

I have done the POC for Cisco Umbrella and Netskope before. Netskope is a user-friendly solution. But Zscaler is better than other solutions regarding its monitoring services.

The solution’s setup is pretty straightforward, but it depends on your experience with Zscaler. It would get a bit difficult for a new buyer owing to multiple profile setups and configurations during the process. I rate the solution’s initial setup as a nine.

I rate the solution's pricing as seven. It is costlier than other solutions. They have multiple standard licenses, but there is no additional cost included.

If you want to establish the right controls from a web security perspective, it's one of the best products in the market. Again, opting for the solution depends on the particular requirement. If you are looking for a solution for banking services, then, you should go with Symantec Blue Coat for a better DLP solution. But if you need a mix of VPN, CASB, and Web Security Gateway, then Zscaler is the better solution.

I rate the solution as an eight out of ten.

I like the granularity of the control of all the traffic, including SSL inspection. I also like the fact that the user interface is intuitive.

The latencies with Zscaler are minimal compared to those of any other competitor. Other competitors do not really have the global scale that Zscaler has and cannot promise low latencies.

Zscaler should continue to make the user interface better. They should also improve the backup network and continue to expand it so that it can handle larger numbers of customers.

We've been working with this solution since 2017. Our customers use a cloud deployment of this solution.

The stability overall in the developed regions, such as the US and Europe, is fairly good. In certain regions, such as South Africa, Zscaler has not been stable for some time.

It is easy to scale. Additional sites and licenses can be added quickly and easily.

Zscaler's technical support is not too bad. They have been helpful when I have had issues, but I have not had to contact them much.

The initial deployment process is quite easy. I've implemented Zscaler Internet Access in large, multinational corporations and recently at a company that is in 64 countries in the world. The deployment is always fairly quick. I have also worked with smaller clients, and Zscaler deployment is even easier in these cases.

Zscaler is an expensive solution, but it's worth the price. 

Their services are unmatched by competitors. Some may come with half the features that Zscaler can offer and be much cheaper. However, they do not have the global coverage that Zscaler has, and they will not provide the same low latencies and the same speeds that Zscaler can.

My advice would be to ensure that you have a good implementer and reseller who can provide guidance. The reseller should be aligned with those who work in security and needs to be aware of anything that might need an exception that needs to be created. This will help avoid any surprises when the solution is live. The other important aspect to consider is training.

Overall, I would rate Zscaler at eight on a scale from one to ten.