Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

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.

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.

We are using the latest version of the solution. It's deployed on a private cloud through Zscaler.

We mostly use this solution in the distributed network where direct internet access has been growing. There are a lot of branches connected with their own internet access, so the solution secures the connectivity at remote locations. There's a very large network with many branches and users working across the globe.

There are about 5,000 people using this solution in my organization. Technical support uses this solution 24/7. We have an operations team and a monitoring and management team.

This solution helps to protect our network.

The cloud proxy and integration are some of the key features. Since there is cloud waste, we can quickly provision it and start working on the configuration. On top of that, they have added a few more features. They have integrated CASB, and file sandboxing is part of it.

We have used this solution for three years. We have seen a lot of traction in the market and a lot of users adopting this solution. We're able to control or manage all the remote locations from one place. When a user is traveling from one location and is connected to the internet, it connects to the bigger cloud and relevant policies will be applied to the user or the device. We have expanded the base from very few users to a large number.

The solution is expensive. They recently revised the pricing and packaging. Some of our existing customers have been asking for alternate solutions for a lower price.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

It's stable.

It's scalable.

Sometimes I feel that the Zscaler team is a bit lacking. The response is slow sometimes.

I would rate technical support three out of five. 

Setup isn't complicated.

I would rate setup as four out of five. Setup took a couple of hours because of some of the requirements. It can take up to a month depending on how many policy configurations need to be done and how many users there are.

Deployment was done in-house.

There are multiple bundles: enterprise, business, and transformation. Transformation includes all the features, but recently I've seen a few more line items that are additional costs. Overall, it's expensive.

They have standard bundling and additional licensing, which is a high cost.

We also evaluated Blue Coat. We have used Forcepoint too, but there were a lot of support challenges. That's why we went with Zscaler.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten. 

The product is pretty good. They are the leader, as far as Gartner Magic Quadrant is concerned. The functionality and bundling are good, but the pricing isn't great. I think Netskope is competition because of their features and better pricing.

The competition offers more flexibility. This is a cloud solution, so a lot of banking customers and government customers are a bit reluctant to use it. Some of the competition has the on-premises model as well. Zscaler could also work on their bundling, packaging, and pricing.

The product is an Internet proxy solution. We use it to manage our users' Internet access, making sure that they don't go to the wrong site. We also use it for data loss prevention.

The main benefit that we have seen is performance improvements based on not having to backhaul traffic and getting cloud services closer to the user.

It provides a modern, cloud-first model. It allows the users quick access to the cloud, depending on where they are in the world. We have users all over the world who access cloud services in their native regions. Previously, we had to backhaul the traffic to our data centers somewhere in the world, then go back to that region. Now, we don't have to do that. A user and data stays within that region. There is no latency there.

It allows us to inspect all our traffic, including SSLs. This is extremely important because most sites use SSLs nowadays. Putting non-SSL inspected data directly into the source would mean that there is a potential for data loss. 

Protecting our customers' data is our number one priority. The data loss prevention rules that we have in place make sure that there is nothing within the packets relevant to our customers. 

The data loss prevention feature is the most valuable. It stops our users from inadvertently leaking our customers' data to the Internet or anywhere else it shouldn't go.

The cloud-native proxy architecture certainly seems fast enough. The performance is good. The multi-country nature of it allows us to keep the proxy closer to the user so a user's data doesn't transit as far as it would otherwise. It helps to keep latency down and the speed up. It also helps a little bit with cyber threats, but that is not necessarily its primary purpose for us.

Zscaler is constantly improving the network. They are adding new data centers and regions all the time. They listen to feedback, and based on where we tell them to go and put data centers, they add new data centers. For example, they created a couple of data centers in the Middle East, which has been very helpful for us.

One thing that they could improve is the ability to import rules from other platforms.

We have been using it for slightly more than a year.

Its stability is first-class. We haven't had any issues during the time that we have been using it.

It certainly scales to what we have asked it to do so far. We have over 50,000 users on it without a single problem.

From a technical support perspective, when we leave a ticket, the time it takes for them to close the ticket is very fast. Their resolution time is exceptional.

I would rate Zscaler Professional Services and technical support as eight out of 10. I am dropping two points because of some blanks in the time zone support.

Positive

We are using it with 20% to 25% of our business at the moment. We are migrating to it from our previous legacy platform.

It adds an alternate layer of protection. We were already using a very powerful tool to do this, but that tool wasn't quite as fast and smart.

It was very complex, but there was training provided by Zscaler. That was very good for understanding it thoroughly. It was complex because we had to make sure that all our rules from previous platforms were migrated over so all our users had access to the same things that they had access to in previous models. 

We aren't yet fully deployed. We have been at it for about a year and a half. We currently have over 50,000 users deployed and another 120,000 to go.

The only pain points that we have are self-inflicted because of our slow rollout of the product, which is not actually Zscaler's fault.

We had Zscaler Professional Services helping us for quite a long time at the start of the project. They made sure that everything was set up correctly with no holes. They were very good and first-class.

So far, it has not saved us on costs as a result of retiring on-premises technology, next-generation firewalls, legacy proxies, or MPLS links. Though, we are expecting it to do that going forward.

I have not been involved with pricing and licensing.

We evaluated several solutions.

Try it, test it out, and make sure it works for you. It is not going to work for everybody because it is not a zero-cost solution. However, it does provide significant benefits in terms of its latency and capability to inspect your traffic as well as keeping your customer data secure.

It hasn't saved us time as compared to deploying and managing traditional network security hardware because we already had everything in place from a traditional standpoint. We take security very seriously. Security is paramount to what we do. We cannot, under any circumstances, allow our customers' data to be compromised. So, we have all the correct things in place from a traditional standpoint. We are now modernizing, and Zscaler Internet Access allows us to do that. However, we will not compromise at all. We have to move slowly to it.

It has not reduced the time that we spend managing security policies. The security policies used on Zscaler Internet Access are the same ones that we used with our previous technologies.

It has not really reduced the number of infected devices in our organization because we already had preventions in place with other technologies. We didn't previously have any infections. 

I would rate Zscaler Internet Access as nine out of 10. It is a very good solution.

You can have mobile employees who forward traffic into a Zscaler client, or you could use a PAC file. So, if users connect at the beach, a hotel, coffee shop or something outside their actual office, it will give them protection.

You can use it with a secured Internet using a web gateway to deliver to the cloud.

The benefits of Zscaler Internet Access are the speed of the solution and never having performance issues or limitations. The fact that none of my end users are experiencing any threats, zero-day, bots, or malware says a lot about the solution. 

Zscaler Internet Access enables the inspection of traffic, including SSLs. You want to make sure that nothing is coming in through your HTTPS traffic. For anything that is coming in that might be a threat, you want to ensure that you are using a good proxy for that. There is malicious traffic out there, so you want to make sure you are tracking and viewing that. There are a lot of threats that come through as well as a lot of programming languages, so you definitely need to inspect traffic.

It is worth it. It works. I don't need multiple alerts, because it is set up with the right policies. Definitely, it is a beneficial device which doesn't always need constant monitoring. It inspects the encrypted traffic and verifies what threats are coming in. It intercepts incoming traffic and decrypts it, then reviews it. So, why have antivirus scanning or web filtering if Zscaler can do it? It protects me from man-in-the-middle attacks as well. When you use a firewall, you have alerts and false positives, but Zscaler Internet Access pretty much decreases those errors and alerts.

There isn't congestion on your network when you are inspecting traffic with Zscaler Internet Access. 

• The integration of the gateway that inspects all ports and protocols. So, there is threat prevention. 
• The cloud sandbox
• VNS security
• Access control that will protect URL filtering and the cloud firewall. 
• Data protection that will protect your gateway, like your CASB or your cloud DLP. The capabilities of this will point your traffic to Zscaler Cloud.

The proxy architecture is the way to go. Zscaler uses it to protect their applications on the cloud. So, if you are using Box, Office 365, or even have an end user using LinkedIn or YouTube, then it will give you updated threat updates. It will also inspect all your traffic so you don't get compromised.

Advanced Threat Protection on Zscaler Internet Access has a few functionalities. It has ways to find threats. So, if they are actually hiding, you could do an inspection of your SSL traffic. You also have DNS security in Zscaler Internet Access that will help you route suspicious command-and-control attacks as well as detect threats when it does a full inspection. 

Zscaler Internet Access protects using data loss prevention. If you have a CASB exposing your cloud out into the network, then Zscaler Internet Access will go ahead and control that unknown cloud application in the CASB, protecting it. There is also data detection with exact data match. This improves the data coming into your cloud so you are protecting it. 

It offers a Cloud Browser Isolation feature, which exfiltrates browser activities from the end user's device. This feature can eliminate our exposures on that.

I like its features because they help me eliminate firewalls. I don't need to have firewalls, SIEMs, or an IPS/IDS. So, if all my end users are remote and using Office 365, I am already protecting them because they are in the cloud. I just have to attach the security application, which makes sure that any user who is mobile or remote is protected, without spending money on other solutions.

I wish there were a lot less products to learn, because there are a lot. They just keep surprising me with new features, even in the SaaS arena, and they keep improving in every facet. We are Zscaler partners, so I got certified in two platforms, but there is a lot room for improvement. There is just too much training, where they focus a lot on protecting the Internet as everyone is moving to the cloud. I would love for the training to be shortened.

I have been exposed to it for a year.

My clients have never really called to tell me that stability has been an issue. Feedback has always been positive. 

It is a scalable solution. It is easy to scale and secure remote users. If a company hires 100 more people, I don't think it would be a problem.

The largest environment, which I reviewed, had 2000 employees.

I would rate their professional services or technical support as five out of five based on their experience and expertise. They know how to answer all my client's problems. They are really quick to trigger and understand the client's needs as well as be very supportive. They do very well when helping their clients.

Positive

What I have seen when I am doing PoCs is you need some perimeters to start building this platform and integrating policies from day one. 

An improvement would be if they could provide an out-of-the-box experience, like 20 to 30 features all ready to go. In comparison, LogRhythm offers out-of-the-box features. With Zscaler Internet Access, there is firewall IPS, multiple security services, filtering, DLP, and CASB browser isolation. These are things that all users are going to be using. However, when an administrator or architect would start building this, I would definitely need to engage professional services to help clients do it.

Every customer is different. On average, it could be a two-week deployment. If you are using other devices, like Fortinet SD-WAN deployment, you definitely have to make sure your configured IPsecs are correct. You might have to review policies and your SD-WAN roles. You need to do a lot of cleaning up before you start deploying.

We have a client who wants to start deploying the Cloud Browser Isolation feature. You can embrace this cloud platform using IPAC Files, which is just a clean way of deploying it.

I have personally worked for other vendors doing professional services as part of a professional services team. Every client decided to purchase professional services because deploying Zcaler Internet Access is too complex.

I am saving money right now because I am not using old technology, like when we had everything on-premise and in the data center. Now, I just have to direct my end users to the Zscaler file and make sure that they are connected and secure. So, I am eliminating the total cost of ownership and the headaches of on-premise devices. I am also reducing their risk by making sure that they are protected in real-time.

When I talk to clients, they mention that there is a return of investment from improving the real-time protection. There is no need anymore to buy: 

• An antivirus
• A third-party vendor to protect your DNS, like Cloudflare. 
• Check Point SandBlast 
• Symantec DLP, Forcepoint, or Netskope since you already have DLP protection. 
• LogRhythm or Splunk for logging.

Those are the benefits. I have a lot of clients explaining this to me that this is the reason to have this solution. Zscaler Internet Access is transforming all that for web traffic security.

The pricing is fair based on its competitive market.

Palo Alto's vulnerability assessment requires an on-prem solution to work with your cloud. Zscaler Internet Access has already been bundled up to provide no-hassle, free Internet network connectivity that ensures protection. When you are using Palo Alto and want to assess vulnerability in your network, you probably need to use on-prem and cloud workloads. There is no reason to do that with Zscaler Internet Access.

Zscaler Internet Access has ease of development, like minimal setups needed for connectivity. You can continue securing protection, allowing your remote users to have access to your applications. Then, it is pretty quick to set up for Zscaler Internet Access. Some companies don't have many tools, so there are no delays there. When it comes to LogRhythm, there are a lot of things that you have to deal with. You have to deal with your log server as well as setting up your authentication server, firewalls, policies, rules, and zones, then you need to get it running and customize it based on your company's needs. Because LogRhythm has 30-plus features ready to go, it can be easier and smoother to deploy. However, there will always be a couple things where you have to do some preliminary requirements before you continue.

Overall, it is a secure platform.

I actually interviewed with Zscaler to work with them because I have been impressed with their technology overall, especially over Palo Alto Networks technology who is their competitor and has a SaaS solution as well. From the top to bottom, Zscaler Internet Access is a great security product that protects my end users and remote users in the cloud.

If you want total cost of ownership and zero-trust architecture, Zscaler is the right solution to fit the needs of any environment.

I would rate the solution as 10 out of 10.

In the past, I prepared a comparative stable between Zscaler and other concurrent or alternative solutions. I saw that Zscaler has a good mark in many criteria. We use Zscaler for centralized data loss prevention (DLP) for web, endpoint, and email. It also has the capacity for SD-WAN integration, threat installation, and is easy to deploy compared to other solutions.

Zscaler, by offering many solutions for workload and remote workforce connectivity, has improved our organization's productivity. It leverages AI for threat intelligence and malware detection, which enhances our security measures.

Zscaler offers a centralized DLP solution for web, endpoint, and email. It also provides SD-WAN integration and an inspection feature that inspects one hundred percent of traffic, ensuring it is secure and meets our connectivity needs.

There are many functionalities in Zscaler Internet Access that need improvements, such as an advanced firewall and logging capabilities to track calls.

I have been using Zscaler Internet Access for one year now.

The stability is rated an eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability of the solution as eight or nine out of ten.

Customer service sometimes is not helpful, with long waiting times when issues arise. However, in some cases, the support team is faster and satisfactory.

Neutral

Before using Zscaler Internet Access, we used another solution, which secured us with a gateway.

I'd rate the setup nine out of ten. It is a relatively easy setup process.

We have seen measurable benefits, such as improvements in security measures and productivity. However, experiences with customer service have been mixed.

Compared to other solutions, Zscaler Internet Access is higher in cost.

Based on my experience, I recommend Zscaler Internet Access.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.