Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

Zscaler Internet Access is used for internet access, security related to internet access, and in some cases, connecting to online applications.

The most valuable features I found in Zscaler Internet Access are the restriction of users for a particular URL, the security feature related to stopping DDoS, and the VPN.

What could be improved in Zscaler Internet Access is its price. It could be cheaper.

I'm working for TCS, which is a service management company, so we manage services for our clients. From my perspective, I've been working with Zscaler Internet Access for six months, but the client could be using it longer than that period. In my case, I've been working with this particular client on Zscaler Internet Access for six months. My company TCS is a partner of Zscaler.

Zscaler Internet Access is quite stable.

I have not had any issues with the scalability of Zscaler Internet Access. I have not encountered scalability issues, but my company has not scaled up that much to encounter problems with scalability, so I can't really comment on how scalable the solution is.

Zscaler Internet Access has good technical support. We have not had an issue where multiple escalations were needed from the support team. The issues were normally quite straightforward and were able to be sorted out with minimum intervention. Whatever support we have requested from Zscaler, we had a very good experience.

The initial setup for Zscaler Internet Access is straightforward. On a scale of one to five, with one being the worst and five being the best, I'm rating my experience with its setup a four.

The pricing for Zscaler Internet Access could be made cheaper.

My advice for people looking into implementing Zscaler Internet Access is that it's quite stable. Its features are quite mature, so I would recommend for people to go for the implementation of the solution.

Zscaler Internet Access is deployed on the cloud, particularly on Zcaler's cloud: the ZIA. It's a SaaS solution.

Because some of our employees need to work remotely, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we were looking for a solution that would keep them safe. We have a Cisco ASA firewall in our company, but when people work remotely they can't be protected by that solution. That's why we decided to go for a WAF.

Zscaler has helped protect our employees wherever they are working, by delivering safe web access. We are doing the same things that we were always doing at our company, and in the same way, but now we are functioning safely outside of our premises. We were already able to work remotely using the Cisco agent, but the Zscaler agent is an improvement at the cybersecurity level.

Another benefit is that we are not managing all the backend infrastructure and that saves 10 to 15 percent of our time in terms of productivity.

It has also reduced the time we spend managing security policies. That's very important because it means that our engineer can spend time focusing on other business activities. The solution is saving 15 to 20 percent of our engineer's time, per day.

Some of the most valuable features are that, as a remote solution it is 

• lightweight
• very easy to set up and configure
• the protection is in the cloud. 

We are agnostic when it comes to what they are doing. We don't have to buy equipment to use it. And when our engineers set it up on our side, we just configured a few settings and we were in.

I would like to see more training and video documentation.

I've been using Zscaler Internet Access for about two months.

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues so far.

The scalability is also very good. We have about 300 users. We gradually want to move all 800 people in our operation over to Zscaler and to remove the local solution.

The technical support we get from them is great. The guys know what they're doing.

Positive

With our legacy system, a VPN solution from Cisco called AnyConnect, we have to buy licenses and equipment, as well as storage in a data center. With this cloud solution, we just pay a fee and it's easy to use. Digital transformation is very important to us because it is a corporate objective. We started with Microsoft 360, and Zscaler is another brick in the wall, in that direction.

We are planning to downgrade our firewall and just keep Zscaler. We're not going to save money with Zscaler, but we are aligning with the corporate objectives by using it.

It's easy to set up. It took my network engineer about one week to prepare the environment, and our software network engineer is the person in charge of keeping it going.

We had a local provider, SISAP, help us. They are a business based in Guatemala, with an office here in Honduras. They worked very well.

The price is competitive. It's not cheap and it's not expensive.

We looked at Cisco Umbrella as an option. But because our organization is part of a corporation that was already using Zscaler, we're aligning ourselves with our headquarters' implementation by going with this solution.

Zscaler is a great solution. We have a very good representative here in Honduras and it was easy to set up. It's a very strong solution with the cloud infrastructure that meets our needs and most of the needs of our users. We are very happy with the solution.

We primarily use the product for proxy services. We are using that to manage services with a third party, so we are not directly exposed to Zscaler.

We enjoy all of the proxy capabilities and the capability to integrate into the SIEM/SOC solution. We also like the capability to have local agents on PCs.

We are using that in managed services, so we are happy with the managed service as it is.

It's a very complete solution and well-organized. 

Sometimes it's not easy to use during large deployments of workstations. It's a bottleneck from a network point of view.

It's a technical solution, so you need to have good architects knowledgeable on Zscaler.

We don't need any other added features.

I've been using the product for nearly two years. 

We have around 1,000 users on the solution. 

We do not have plans to increase usage. 

We have other products as well. In the current set of products, I'm not forcing any swaps or changes.

It's a managed service. We are not exposed to the initial setup process.

It's a managed service, so it's included in the service.

We don't have a direct relationship with Zscaler as we use it in a managed service. 

I'd advise new users to be sure that they have good architects to integrate. It's quite complicated.

Sometimes the complexity of integrating with legacy and other complex setups is a chore.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Zscaler Internet Access's best feature is the granular policy controls.

Zscaler Internet Access's troubleshooting is very limited, and their textbook logs need to be more informative.

I've been using Zscaler Internet Access for over five years.

Zscaler Internet Access's stability is pretty good, and when an issue occurs, they're very quick to notify the end-users and fix it.

Zscaler Internet Access is very scalable, and requests for scalable solutions are met quickly.

Zscaler Internet Access's technical support is very good and fast. Sometimes, I've had trouble with level one people, but once an issue is escalated to higher-up engineers, they're pretty quick to provide the solutions.

The initial setup was straightforward - Zscaler Internet Access is plug-and-play, and it's the simplest proxy solution I could recommend.

Licenses are available on a per-host basis. Some features like sandboxing require an additional fee, but most standard features are included in the license.

Zscaler Internet Access is very good, and I would recommend it to others. I would give it a rating of eight out of ten.

We use Zscaler for VPN connections and for internet security.

The internet security that it provides is valuable.

The VPN is valuable, as the whole technology is very different from a traditional VPN.

There are a few features that are not compatible with the Azure cloud.

It's not fully compatible with our environment because of the way that it is divided into business units. In order to get it working properly, there are some things that we had to put in for enhancements. Otherwise, everything works well.

We have been using Zscaler Internet Access for about a year.

It is a stable solution, although once or twice, we had issues with latency and slowness. Other than on these occasions, it has been fine.

Scalability-wise, everything is good. We have approximately 3,000 users and we do plan to increase usage. Ultimately, we want to include everyone, which is about 10,000 users.

We have been in contact with technical support and they are very responsive. They also have TAM support, which means that we have a dedicated engineer to look into our issues. That is nice to have.

I have used Cisco Umbrella in the past, which is similar. However, there are definitely differences between these two solutions. Cisco Umbrella is a DNS-based web filtering solution, whereas Zscaler is a cloud-based web application firewall combined with a regular firewall, antivirus, IPS, and other security features.

The initial setup is straightforward and the deployment took place over a couple of days.

We used Zscaler Professional Services for the deployment.

In summary, this is a good product and I completely recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The product is an endpoint solution for private and internet security. I use it myself in my home office. I'm in sales. I use it as an endpoint solution for my laptop, for my device, in order to get access to some internal service applications, such as pricing and time management tools.

Zscaler is a very stable solution.

The security is excellent.

I don't know whether it's Zscaler or not, however, sometimes I can't access my time management. I need to wait and try again a few hours later. Typically, if I let some time pass, I can access it again.

From time to time, there's instability in terms of the user experience. I don't know whether it's Zscaler or the time instrument server itself. I don't know the root cause here, that this is the only thing, that causes me issues. Otherwise, I'm quite happy with it.

The solution should do more in regards to handling phishing emails. They maybe should pair with a solution like Palo Alto in order to offer a more holistic view of the security and offer behavioral analytics or endpoint protection, etc., and all from one vendor. Data Lake, for example, is a product that gets the information and gives feedback to the user. There seems to be a high volume of phishing emails that we get, and I'd like to understand what the company is doing to address that. Zscaler seems like it's just a bit too static.

I've been using the solution for four years.

Aside from issues I've had accessing time management from time to time, it seems to be a stable solution.

The question of scalability would be best posed to our CSO. However, my whole team uses it. It's been scaled in our organization to a very small extent. In that sense, it was easy to scale. 

I don't know the maximum capacity, however, it's my understanding that the solution is suitable for organizations like us with about 3,000 employees.

We have our own technical support. I've never directly contacted Zscaler in order to get assistance.

I purely go to our first level of support. Any issues I've ever had have been solved on the first or second level. It's my understanding, that if the issue exceeds a certain level of support, it would be forwarded to Zscaler. However, I've never had issues of that nature. The only issues I've dealt with have been rather easy to solve.

We were previously using Pulse Secure in our organization. I needed to switch it on and off. On top of that, certain applications I could not reach. This was slow and proved to be unstable.

Zscaler, on the other hand, is more stable and also more secure.

The initial setup was straightforward. It wasn't complex at all.

My understanding was that the deployment itself happened pretty quickly.

There was an announcement from our security, and by our CSO. Then it was rolled out and Pulse Secure was turned off. There was a migration phase in the project and that's it. It all happened rather fast.

I don't handle billing or payments and therefore don't know the exact pricing of the solution of what exactly our organization pays.

I wasn't involved in the decision-making process when it came to looking for a solution.

We're just a customer.

I would recommend other users also have a glance at other solutions. Options like Prisma Access by Palo Alto or Check Point may be ideal, depending on the needs of the business.

Zscaler seems easy to understand and easy to use, however, there is probably some room for improvements. At my former company, we were using Check Point. This was also pretty good. Zscaler seems more modern, however, I'm referencing an experience from some 10 years ago.

Overall, I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use this solution mainly to protect or provide internet security for our customers including URL filtering for SSL interception, tech protection and to provide phishing protection for our web links.

The URL filtering has been the most valuable feature. 

They're constantly improving because they have a very short development cycle where they add more features every one to three months. If we like a particular feature, we request it through a product enhancement and if it gets accepted, it gets implemented within that year. 

They block Zscaler IPs when the traffic origin is from Zscaler IPs. They've been blocked by certain government organizations so the end users are not able to visit those websites unless we ask them to unblock those IP. This is a bit problematic.

We've been working with Zscaler for almost a year and a half.

This is a stable solution. It's a cloud service so we've never faced any outages. The availability has always been 100% for the past one and a half years. I don't think we've had any incidents with any of our data centers. Even if they do have a problem with a data center, they usually switch to the nearest region.

This is a very scalable solution. 

We have had different experiences with the technical support. I would rate them a seven out of ten. The response time is good but sometimes it is difficult for them to pinpoint the root cause of problems.

We previously used Symantec. The main problem with Symantec was that they did not have a local data center here in UAE. That was one of the biggest requirements for our customers.

The initial setup is very straightforward. They provide the cloud settings and then it's your responsibility to direct your traffic towards the Zscaler Cloud and they manage everything else for you. The infrastructure is managed by the vendor and themselves. We don't have to worry about any maintenance. 

We have experienced a return on our investment. We have used competitor solutions but the experience with this particular solution was much better.

We have purchased it for a maximum of 2000 users at one location and 5000 at another location but I am not sure of the amount we paid.

It's easy to deploy and easy to use. There's a lot less administrative overhead so you won't require a very big team to manage it. It's the biggest benefit.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

The protection is most valuable.

The interface for administration could be better. They should upgrade the management portal.

Their support could also be better.

We have probably been using this solution for about three years. We are using its latest version. 

Its stability is reasonable. We've had a couple of outages, but overall, it has been okay.

Its scalability is fine.

It could be better.

It was probably in the middle in terms of complexity. Bits of it were easy, and bits of it were more complicated than we envisaged. I would rate it a three out of five in terms of the setup.

Its implementation probably took several weeks. It is deployed on-premises as well as on a public cloud.

We had involved a third party. It was a bit of a mix.

For the maintenance, there are about three people.

It is quite expensive. It does its job, but it is quite expensive for what we need.

Understand your use case and be sure of your technical ability to implement the policies.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.