Citrix Gateway Reviews

I participate in integrator projects over the last year or two. Citrix Gateway is used in both my company and my customer's companies.

The most valuable feature in Citrix Gateway is the securable, modular solution. The most useful behaviors that Citrix has is that you can secure the applications and all the infrastructure in a modular way. You can segment the securization in groups, allowing you to do a lot of things.

Citrix Gateway is really strong and secure for the companies to have the Endpoint Analysis feature configured. You can configure this to check what the company needs to be checked. Companies need to authorize some devices to check if antivirus can accomplish the necessities of the company. The final appliance is really secure for accessing the company's network resources.

You have many ways to maintain security protocols. One way is using Citrix Gateway, and another is the Citrix policies where you can configure many things in desktops and applications published for the company.

It's difficult to say that because Citrix Gateway is changing all the time. It is improving all the time, and I think that it is periodically giving us patches. Anything that I can think to be improved, I think they have already thought about it.

Citrix Gateway is not for small companies; it's for medium companies because the pricing is better for more users. A company should have at least a certain amount of users to justify the pricing.

My biggest customer organization has at least 4,000 users. The smallest one of my customers has just 40 users. That company is not thinking about buying a NetScaler appliance for its organization. They just need a CVAD license to enter organizational resources like applications. For accessing the storefronts, they use a VPN, that kind of solution that they can permit.

I had to contact them in the past, so they are fast. I had to contact Microsoft too. Microsoft products and Citrix Gateway products are linked in some way. When contacting the support from Citrix, they are faster than Microsoft.

Citrix Gateway is faster, from my point of view. Citrix Gateway's technical support is high. Very experienced engineers contact you in order to troubleshoot the problem.

In the past, I had to contact support not many times. I had to contact once or twice because I had a physical appliance. Physical appliances create maybe more complex problems than virtual appliances. When you are touching and configuring a physical appliance, sometimes you need help.

Positive

For starting the project, normally, largest companies have a lot of documentation. Not smaller ones; at the smallest ones, you go and you should create all the documentation because in the biggest, you can find already done URS, SDS of an old project. You can start from them, but in the smallest, you should generate everything. You can start with the user requirements, of course. We need to know what is expected from the solution.

The price is one aspect, but technically it is complete. Technically, it is really complete.

I have experience with Citrix Gateway. You can really modify those kinds of necessities on NetScaler, so you can configure which ciphers you need to accomplish. You can automate the use of certificates and renewal of them in the infrastructure using the Citrix Gateway NetScaler console, for example.

I am one of the Citrix VDI and Windows virtualization specialists. You have to know about both products because they are linked. I work for an integrator. In the past, the current company that I work for is not a partner, but in the past, I worked in a partner too.

Citrix Gateway products like Enterprise Browser, Endpoint Management, and Secure Private Access are really secure products. My overall rating for this product is 8.

I am on the customer side using Citrix products, specifically Citrix CVAD for Virtual and Desktop virtualization. I am using Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service. We are using Citrix Gateway and also Device Trust Agent, but not the secure access or ZTNA.

The features I find most valuable in Citrix Gateway are the GSLB features for disaster recovery, primarily due to the native integration with Citrix applications, the CVAD product, and Citrix Gateway.

We are using the single sign-on feature of Citrix Gateway, along with the Citrix console and the policies such as SSL policies or authentication and authorization policies, which are very simple to use. Adaptive access policies in Citrix Gateway have helped, but they come with a lot of complexity since applying these policies requires configuring so many things.

I see room for improvement in several areas. The monitoring site could be much better because monitoring NetScaler and Citrix Gateway is too difficult with just SNMP traps available. Improving the monitoring site and the dashboard is essential, and I would like to see more dashboards as that would be useful. There is also room for improvement when it comes to the GUI.

Certification management could be more automated. I don't have specific additional features I would like to see for Citrix Gateway in the next release to make it even better.

I have been working with Citrix Gateway for fifteen years.

We are not using SSL VPN. Before, we were using the Endpoint Analysis agent, but we replaced it with the Device Trust agent. We used the EPA agent for client certificate authentication and gathered information for the Smart Access feature, but we are no longer using it.

We have not opened any cases for technical support so far.

Negative

Before my time here, my previous colleagues used F5, and I used F5 a little bit, but I don't remember it well because it was eight or nine years ago.

We use this solution with ADC balancing and WAF protection and with the gateway for remote access.

The institution I work with is an education institution.

It's a large business.

The Citrix Gateway is important to implement, especially the WAF protection of the web server.

The Citrix Gateway is for the performance of the system and the security principles.

We appreciate the interface and the possibility of scale, as we have implemented a VPX instance in a virtual environment. It's easy to scale and easy to implement.

Scaling is important for us because we have different moments of high demand. For example, in admission, in the academic process, the congestion is very high.

This has a very high impact, especially for the remote users. The administrative staff and teachers have a very strong source of work remotely, which helps to improve their jobs in extra hours and additional duties.

In the past, I submitted some support tickets, and while the support did resolve the problems, the time taken was sometimes long. They can perhaps improve the time for solutions in the support ticket.

The price has been reasonable in the past, but recently we have a new request that is very high at this moment.

At this time it costs 35% more than other solutions.

Positive

We evaluated other options.

We evaluated F5 solutions with five IP solutions, and we also evaluated Radware solutions and A10 solutions.

The Citrix Gateway solutions are more complete, more complex, and the implementation is quicker for those solutions.

Another difference is the WAF functionalities; the Citrix Gateway is more complex for the web. Other functionalities include the IPS list of reputation; we use this feature for Citrix Gateway, which other functionalities don't have.

At this moment we don't use the authentication feature of the solutions.

We have policy access in the solutions.

It helps maintain our security protocols in our organization.

The policy access we have provides granularity and differentiation of different roles in the institutions, so with this we can assign the minimum privilege to the different roles.

I recommend the solutions.

I would rate the Citrix Gateway an eight.

I am working with a vast portfolio that includes end-to-end complete DWWS technologies. I take care of digital locker, VDI technologies including VMware, Citrix Gateway, smart analytics, smart ops, and many other digital workplace services.

I have experience working with Citrix XenServer and Citrix Gateway. Citrix Gateway serves multiple enterprise scenarios. The first use case is secure remote access, also called ICA proxy, which provides users secure encrypted access to Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops over the internet. The second use case is zero trust network access, which enforces conditional access based on user device identity and posture. The third implementation is multi-factor authentication (MFA), which can integrate with SAML, Azure AD, Okta, or RSA for enforcing strong user authentication.

The fourth feature is endpoint analysis, where pre-authentication checks can be performed on endpoints before granting access, such as verifying antivirus versions and domain membership. Additional functionality includes single sign-on (SSO) integration with Citrix Virtual Apps, internal web applications, and SaaS-based applications such as Salesforce and O365. It also features load balancing, including GSLB and HA capabilities, enabling global server load balancing and high availability across multiple gateway nodes, sites, and applications. Furthermore, it offers secure SaaS access through integration with Citrix Secure Private Access or Gateway Services to securely deliver SaaS-based applications.

Citrix Gateway offers an array of valuable features. The most significant ones include single sign-on (SSO), which enhances user convenience and security, and the load balancing feature, which improves network efficiency by distributing incoming traffic across multiple servers. Lastly, secure SaaS access is particularly valuable as it ensures that SaaS-based applications are delivered securely. These features contribute significantly to optimizing both user experience and system performance.

The main purpose of Citrix Gateway is to enforce the appropriate level of access to the correct user on the proper device under the correct conditions. This is enabled through Citrix Gateway combined with endpoint analysis and optional Citrix analytics for security.

Regarding improvements, implementing adaptive access policies on Citrix Gateway could be enhanced, particularly in security posture. Although it enforces real-time contextual access control based on device, user network risk, certain aspects can be improved. Other areas for improvement include BYOD access control and risk-based decision-making. Additionally, there is potential for reducing administrative overhead by applying policies dynamically based on context rather than static rules. Incident response speed is another area that could be enhanced.

I have been working with Citrix Gateway for more than 10 years.

Regarding scalability, the product offers hardware-based high throughput designed for large environments. One MPX box version can support between 9,000 to 50,000 users.

The solution features high availability, supporting both active-passive and active-active deployments to ensure constant product availability. It includes failover handling with auto failover between primary and secondary nodes. Monthly firmware upgrades are implemented to maintain stability. Overall, the product demonstrates strong stability.

The support experience varies as it is not 100% satisfactory. While there are multiple support tiers with priority response times of around 30 minutes, there appears to be a limitation in the number of technical teams who can immediately understand and resolve issues. However, they maintain an extensive knowledge base and documentation. The community forums are active and helpful. The support experience has received mixed reviews, as not all support staff possess the necessary technical expertise to handle inquiries effectively.

Based on these factors, I would rate the support at 7 out of 10.

Positive

The return on investment depends on specific use cases, particularly when comparing traditional laptop deployments to Citrix Gateway implementations.

I am not interested in being a reference for Citrix or Splunk. The most valuable features I consider are SSO, load balancing, and secure SaaS access. While I am open to being contacted via email by Citrix, I am not interested in serving as a reference. The overall review rating for Citrix Gateway is 9 out of 10.

My primary use case for Citrix Gateway is to facilitate secure and remote access. I use it for load balancing and dual-factor authentication. It acts as a reverse proxy appliance to secure applications exposed to the Internet.

I find Citrix Gateway valuable for its capabilities as a reverse proxy, providing security to applications exposed to the Internet. Key features include load balancing, dual-factor authentication, clientless VPN, and Web Application Firewall (WAF). 

The product effectively helps me protect the organization's network from potential threats, thereby securing our environment from hackers and ransomware attacks.

Currently, Citrix is improving its solutions, and focusing more on AI features could further enhance its performance.

I have been working with Citrix Gateway for more than 15 years.

These days, I find Citrix products to be very stable, and there is no need to struggle with them.

I believe that the scalability of Citrix Gateway depends on the project's requirements, as it can vary from simple load balancing to extensive Web Application Firewall implementations.

The initial setup was challenging in the past, requiring significant networking expertise, but it has become much easier with the product's stabilization.

The deployment generally involves one or two engineers per project, depending on the project's complexity.

A measurable benefit for me is that Citrix Gateway secures our environment from potential threats, which can save substantial financial resources, especially in preventing data breaches or ransomware attacks.

I consider Citrix Gateway to be an expensive solution, generally ranging from $5,000 to $15,000 yearly, depending on the model. It is seen as a premium product compared to competitors like F5, and it is used by customers willing to invest in high-quality solutions.

In the market, I know of two or three products available, including NetScaler and F5, which are premium products like Citrix Gateway.

I advise that a person needs to have a mature understanding of networking and application architecture to effectively manage Citrix Gateway. It's not an easy product for beginners. My overall rating for Citrix Gateway is nine out of ten. However, for small businesses, it may be less cost-effective due to the pricing.

We use it for load balancing with NetScaler. It also has a VPN for secure connectivity.

I like the built-in VPN and NetScaler integration for load balancing and secure connectivity for network security. 

Stability and security could be enhanced.

I have been using it for four years now. 

It's a virtual appliance, so it's scalable based on your requirements. It's not hardware-based.

We have close to 1200 end users who use it, and we plan to add 1000 more users in the future.

We have vendor support. They log into the system and troubleshoot any issues we encounter. The support has been good.

We are planning to add FortiTester, FortiOS, FortiToken, and FortiShieldX  in addition to what we have, but we don't have FortiMonitor at the moment.

The initial setup requires expertise just like other solutions. So, it's not straightforward.

The integration is good but I would like to see more integration with different platforms. If it is available, that would be an advantage. But as far as I know, the Gateway only works with Citrix solutions.

The deployment process is not straightforward. It requires more expertise and understanding of the requirements. It's best to do it with assistance, otherwise, it's very challenging.

Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten. If you need to share resources across a corporation, I would recommend Citrix Gateway. 

However, the specific scenario and requirements need to be identified before deployment.

It is for any type of company. If someone works with Citrix products, it makes sense to deploy Citrix Gateway because it can look inside the ICA protocol. No other products in the market are able to do that.

Citrix Gateway improved the security of the access of our applications outside the network.

It's a combination of many features that has been most beneficial for organizations' remote access needs. I think security is the most important, with the MFA capability of Citrix Gateway being a very good point. Security is the most important thing that all companies have to look for. 

Another benefit is the way you can configure Citrix Gateway, with several policies for conditional access, for example. It's the same security, but implemented in a different way.

Conditional access is a good point. MFA is another. All communications are via SSL tunnels. Additionally, Citrix Gateway has the capabilities to protect against several types of attacks on your network, like denial of service. And there are a lot of other products that Citrix Gateway has inside.

The pricing could be better. In many cases, our customers are thinking of migrating to other products in the market, like F5 BIG-IP. In many cases, companies are looking to migrate their entire solution to another vendor like Microsoft or VMware, including the Citrix ADC (formerly NetScaler) component.

In many cases, you have to do several things manually. It's the only way to do several configurations. I think a good point is to have a better console.

It needs to improve the capabilities of AI.

I have been with this product for 18 years. I remember the evolution of the products and features. I started with the Gateway product when it was still called NetScaler.

In many cases, things don't work the first time after updating. You need to do additional things to get the solution working in production. In the past, it had a lot of vulnerabilities, so many of our customers don't trust Citrix ADC anymore. It's complicated.

The first level support is very poor. The engineers taking the calls or incidents don't have enough knowledge. So in many cases, you have to wait for the escalation support engineer. These people have more capabilities. In general, you have to waste a lot of time waiting for an escalation engineer.

Citrix should increase the capabilities of the support people working on it.

Neutral

My role is focused on VDI solutions. So, I work with Microsoft RDS, Citrix, and VMware Horizon.

I work with Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops. I've also worked with Citrix ADC (formerly NetScaler), but only with the Gateway part. I don't work with the full ADC product content, only the gateway part for connecting to desktops or applications.

In the past, the pricing was a good point, but at this moment, the pricing is a bit high because the price has increased a lot. In many cases, companies don't want to renew their Citrix Gateway solution because the price is very high.

At this moment, you only have the option to buy the biggest product pack. In the past, you had different options for buying Citrix ADC. Now, you can only buy the most biggest product package, the premium ADC. It doesn't matter if you need all the features or not; you have to buy the whole bundle.

The support is included in the standard license fee. But if you want to have a higher level of support, you need to pay more.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten because of of the price and the complexity of the solution. I would not recommend it to small companies because the solution is a very big bundle, and many companies don't need all the capabilities. I think Citrix ADC is only for big companies.

I would recommend it to other people.

We use the solution for remote access.

The stability is good. The product is straightforward. We can get access from anywhere.

The interface must be improved. The implementation process is a bit complex. It requires much experience. The tool must provide better integration and connectivity.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I rate the tool’s stability a seven out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. We have around 300 users. We have 30 concurrent users.

We have contacted the support team when we had some issues. The technical personnel respond fast. We did not face any issues with support.

The setup is straightforward. The deployment does not take much time. We ensure the branding has been updated and incorporate the solution into our organization.

We can deploy the solution in-house.

I will recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We can use the product to access the local network. Also, we can create rules to maintain access, responsibilities, and authority for individuals. We can also generate logs using the product.

The product enables us to collect logs from the systems. We can analyze the logs in SCM for incident and event management.

The product should be more secure. It could provide engineers with more logs.

I have been using the solution for about one year.

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

The solution is scalable. I would rate the product’s scalability a nine or nine and a half out of ten.

We have been in contact with the tech support. I am satisfied with the support.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We have a consultant for deploying the product. The deployment took around six months.

The solution has a yearly licensing fee. The product is not much expensive.

Compared to other solutions, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our virtual machines. We use it to access development environments. 

It's pretty smooth. I didn't have any hiccups or issues with it. The solution is stable. It is easy to use.

It does basically what it is meant for.

Sometimes the input-output has issues. Maybe it's not as seamless when you plug in audio. It takes some time to reflect that into Citrix and basically to allow Citrix to use those audiences and put out devices.

It's a stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have not seen any outages or anything as such.

I'm not sure how many people are using the solution in our organization. It's at least 2,000 to 3,000. It's well less than 10,000.

I'm not aware as to if the solution itself is scalable. 

I've never dealt with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

I've not used any other tools to connect to any other virtual machines. I cannot compare it with another tool.

I'm not sure about the pricing. As an end-user, it's not an aspect I can handle. 

I'm basically a user and not from a technical side. We've been using Citrix Database for all the automation systems scattered across most of the organizations for accessing development. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

As a user, I can recommend the solution. However, from technical insights, like what are the other options available in the market or how does it cost and how effective the support is, I can't speak to how the solution is. 

That said, Citrix is quite a big draw. The tool has been used by many organizations. Definitely, it will be a good choice to check out.