Zscaler Internet Access Reviews

The solution is used for security purposes especially. Any solution in the organization has its purpose.

We have been reselling this solution for more than five years now.

Zscaler Internet Access integrates effectively, especially with the high-level IP services. However, there are some challenges with new software development on the SD-WAN part and sometimes with routing of data. Issues appear sometimes with upgrades, but that's really an exception; it's not happening frequently.

Regarding scalability, it's a challenge for Zscaler Internet Access at this moment, so I rate it a seven.

For us, it's recent, but we are also a distributor and reseller, having been using and working with this product for more than five years now.

It's very stable; however, due to the success, they are slightly behind with resources. This includes following up on new opportunities and finding the right resources to be available for customers' questions when sold.

Zscaler Internet Access is quite expensive, but it delivers. Sometimes, depending on the customer and the service and why it's used, it's acceptable.

The deployment process for Zscaler Internet Access is quite straightforward. I think the success of Zscaler has had an impact on their resources.

The quality of technical support depends on which department you're reaching out to at Zscaler Internet Access.

Positive

We are providing installation and deployment for our customers with Zscaler Internet Access.

The installation may take a couple of weeks, but it depends on the customer. The experience I have until now is a couple of weeks.

The implementation is done together with the project managers of Zscaler Internet Access.

From our side, the whole process mostly involves the project manager that is dealing with the deployment.

I think as long as Zscaler Internet Access is stable, it can have some financial benefits. Until now, we can confirm that for a few customers I am working with.

Zscaler Internet Access is quite expensive, but it delivers. Sometimes, depending on the customer and the service and why it's used, it's acceptable. We get more and more reactions about the price going up, sometimes too much or too little.

For the stability of Zscaler Internet Access, I would recommend it, but for the price, I think it's too expensive. Most customers that use it have the money and want the whole package, a managed service. However, I think it should be less expensive because we're losing customers to the competition.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate this solution an eight.

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.

I use Zscaler Internet Access as an internet proxy for security.

The most valuable feature of Zscaler Internet Access is that it is a consolidated solution, it comes with many features, such as DLP.

Zscaler Internet Access could improve by adding a VPN feature.

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

Zscaler Internet Access is highly stable.

The scalability of Zscaler Internet Access is good.

The technical support from Zscaler Internet Access is good.

I rate the support from Zscaler Internet Access a four out of five.

The initial setup of Zscaler Internet Access is simple.

We did evaluate other solutions before choosing Zscaler Internet Access, such as Symantec.

I rate Zscaler Internet Access an eight out of ten. 

The solution is primarily used as a secure web gateway.

Overall, it's a good solution. 

We had very few issues during implementation.

Technical support is quite helpful and responsive once you get a hold of them. 

It has private access and has a lot of features inbuilt including DLP, CASB, et cetera. 

The solution is scalable and stable. 

The solution can be a bit pricey.

Sometimes, support isn't available. 

Zscaler does not have any local data centers. For example, if we have our customers in Czech Republic, in the Czech Republic they don't have their data center, as the local content, in the Czech language. They should do something in the Czech Republic and ensure that the language is accessible. They should have one data center as these people want to see the local content. Everyone wants to see their first language in the available content.

Also, in Brazil, they just have two data centers in São Paulo and they should consider expanding to other data centers.

When you check the logs, you cannot see what policy is allowed. That is one thing that is lacking. If I put someone's account in Zscaler, then it should show which policy it will be applicable for. For example, in Forcepoint we have that feature. This is something that Zscaler needs to add. They just need to put the account of some users and check whether they will be able to access that or not.

They don't have MFA, or multi-factor authentication, for admins.

I've used the solution for about one year and three or four months. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution is very scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's on the cloud, which makes scaling easy.

The support is great. They helped us during implementation. 

When we ask for support, however, they reschedule the calls. Support guys are not always available. If I schedule the call for three to four days before, they will reschedule it. Sometimes, we'll join the call and they won't and then they'll just reschedule. That is something that has been disappointing. 

The implementation process was pretty straightforward. We did not run into issues. 

We did have some issues in that there were professional services that were purchased already, however, we came to know very late that we had any professional services support available from the vendor. We ended up handling things ourselves. The professional services were okay, however, they just were able to help us at a high level with recommendations.

The product is a bit expensive. That said, that is not in our scope to worry about pricing. 

We were integrated with Azure Identity. We are not sure if the client has their own data center or what they are using in that backend, or which cloud provider.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use it for security. We installed it on our work computers and also for other traffic from the office. We are using it for perimeter security and that is useful for us.

I will give you an example. Before implementing a computer scan on all PCs, our main problem was when we received a phish or something like it. It was impossible for us to tell if it was people from inside or outside our organization that clicked on it. If people that were inside our organization had different appliances for checking the traffic, you had to connect each appliance and get the receipt from that URL. It was a little bit complicated. With the scanner, for example, if somebody clicks on a bad URL you just add that to the reporting part and in a matter of minutes it generates a report, where you can see exactly who clicked on that link and who did something before you got a chance to block that malicious URL. That is the first benefit that comes to my mind and I think it was a huge improvement in our site. Having a centralized firewall that protects the whole topography is quite awesome when you also have users that are not on the plan because it actually improves visibility of those users.

I cannot say that I found only one feature that is most valuable, but I can tell you that I find value in traffic scanning and samples. That I think is quite valuable for all their software. The scanning feature is impressive, because they do not introduce a big latency to the traffic. I really like how they manage this part.

On the technical side, the only thing that I believe this scanner can improve is in the way they allocate traffic. For example, a big site doesn't have the ability to have its IPs inside the cloud, so Zscaler doesn't allocate you certain IPs for traffic. Your traffic goes to the nearest Zscaler point, and from there you get an IP. Sometimes that is problematic, because your users use the same IPs that another client is using so you don't get the ability to do some rules using some IPs. For example, you cannot use conditional access to high influence IP. You can't say if somebody goes to Zscaler I know that traffic is secure so I can let them past. In this scenario you cannot do this, because Zscaler is using a pool of IPs and they'll circle them for all the clients. I would like to see the ability to choose a pool of IPs for my company, set up rules based on them, and know that those IPs are not used by other companies.

We've been using Zscaler for 4 years.

The product is mature. I can't say it's not stable. It's been there for a while now and it proves that it can do the job according to what they say they do. I cannot say that they are not doing the best of what they think they should do. So at this point, they have a mature product and are working quite okay.

There are no issues there. The number of users doesn't matter, whether you have 100 users or 2,000 users. The only impact you'll have is on financial side. For 100 users you will pay differently than 10,000 users, so I don't think you have an issue on this side.

All our users have libraries on their computers. So if they have a device from the company, they have Zscaler on it. I think we have about 3,000 users in my company.

We have one or two people on maintenance from the global networking team. You don't need to do something special, it just works. The only thing we need to do is check daily if there are any threats, as well as to verify the US dollar and stuff like that. In terms of maintaining it, doing something to make it work, you don't have to worry about that. It's a cloud provided solution. The only thing that you have to concentrate upon is the business side. You have to see how your business is affected, what type of traffic you have in there, and check security threats on your site. That's it. The product by itself is run by the Zscaler team and they do a good job. We do not have maintenance debts. The only incidence that I remember is last month they were blocking our site or something , but that was solved quickly with support from Zscaler.

I did not get any experience directly, I got some instance of indirect support. I asked networking for something and they work directly with the support. My impression was that they responded quickly, relatively speaking. I don't know exactly how it works on the other side, but my impression indirectly was that they offer quick support.

no cloud solution and we had to route back to office the road warriors trafic 

From what I discussed with my colleagues from the network that we were working with, it wasn't a difficult process. I cannot tell you how long it took.

We didn't have a similar solution. We had a solution, but we didn't have something cloud-based as a security solution, so I would say we did not use any cloud security-based system.

Check if a product like this makes sense for you. And look at the specifics: what you need in terms of security and what features you would like to have in it. Zscaler is one solution. It's a good solution, but it doesn't do everything. First of all, analyze a few solutions and make a demo. Without a demo, I do not recommend moving forward, because any security solution comes with a price. There is also the financial price, to know if that is okay for your company. Usually Zscaler works best for companies that have users that do not stay in an office. They have road warriors. I would recommend it for companies that have a lot of users moving from here to there.

I would rate Zscaler as eight out of ten. It's not an ideal solution, one of the things is that I do not have my IP fully inside it. For example, you have countries where they don't have a lot of presence and then sometimes they go to another country where they have a presence or data center. When you come back to the other country, and you have to open a fiber, it can be geographically restrictive. I find my country and am going through by neighborhood. When I come back to my country, I cannot see it because I'm geographically restricted. I'm not part of that country, so that's one reason Zscaler isn't ideal.

We primarily use this web security solution to protect our users in remote locations or branches from internet threats. It is very important for our organization to protect our users, even if they are not connected to our network. 

Zscaler Web Security protects our users in remote locations from internet threats even if they are not connected to our network.

What I like most about Zscaler Web Security is that we can have our users protected from internet threats and viruses even when they're not connected to our network. I love the fact that it enables us to create whitelists and blacklists based on specific users. These features are extremely important to us and that is what we like most about this solution.

The reporting could be improved to make it a little bit easier. When it comes to individual users, I'd like to see easy reporting that can be shared with executives. Due to my technical background I don't have issues to understand the reporting. 

However, if I have to give a report to an executive to read, he may find it too confusing. He wants to see something simplistic that contains information like what the user's access time was, how long the user spent time on the site, which sites was visited, what they did etc. The current reports can, therefore, be somewhat improved and simplified. 

Another thing that I would like to see is if Zscaler could have a separate product for direct access. I looked at a private access solution, but I understand there's a separate product that isn't integrated with this. 

We've never experienced any outages or other problems since we started using this solution, so I believe it is very stable and secure. 

I think it scaled quite well. We are currently using it in a small organization with about 250 users, and I would say it will scale as our company grows. 

We've used the technical support on occasion, and they were excellent. 

We bought Zscaler Web Security through our Internet Service Provider, so they handled most of the setup. So, from our part, it was quite straightforward.

Our Internet Service Provider is a reseller, and they helped with the installation and setup. Their level of expertise was outstanding. Maintenance and deployment will be easy to manage and I believe one person will be able to handle it. It won't be a full-time job. 

Although I can't put a figure to it, we've definitely seen a return on our investment.

Our monthly fee is around R3000 and I think it is very reasonable.

My advice to other users would be to determine if the reporting meets their requirements. They should get their whitelists, blacklists, groups and active directory set up properly before trying to implement it because it has a very strong integration with the active directory. Therefore, if you have your active directory well set up, you can classify your users and create groups as to who can go where and who can do what on the internet.

If I have to rate this product, I will give it a nine out of ten - simply because I never give anything a ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for the protection from malware and malicious attacks. We also use it for bandwidth control to compare business and individual use. We use it in conjunction with Palo Alto. 

The most valuable feature is bandwidth control. It has good traffic visibility. 

The implementation process needs improvement. Even if you have implemented it, it doesn't mean that it is done, you have to pay for the service afterward. It's not a one-shot implementation, you need to spend some more effort on it afterward.

It also needs better integration with other applications as well. There are some restrictions.

I would like to see them incorporate a user ID or application ID in the next release of this solution. 

Since you need to maintain it the maintenance payout is not that good. I cannot say that it's stable.

In my company, we have around five thousand users, but just the main account would be around three thousand. 

It works every day and it's protecting against the attacks and so we are using on a daily basis.

I would rate their technical a four out of five, based on my experience with some support cases. Their support is good. 

The initial setup was okay but the problem is that afterward, you have to put in more time and money. 

We used a consultant for the deployment. 

It's not an expensive solution but it is more expensive than some of its competitors. The licensing model is good if you pay for the medium-level licensing model. We get many features with the license but if you would like to integrate with other things, you have to spend time and money for the maintenance but other than that you don't have to buy additional new licenses. 

It was also one of four other products I believe but the Zscaler I can say that for bandwidth control, it is good, so we are not using at the moment data loss prevention feature so I cannot comment on that, but I believe, when you use Zscaler, you are not protected from all malware and malicious attacks, so you may need another tool just to cover these gaps. Zscaler is not enough for advanced protection. You need an additional tool.

Bandwidth control, reporting, and visibility are good but the cloud-based and the advanced protection aren't so great so I would give it a six out of ten.