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.

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.

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 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.

It's a proxy solution, and we use it for reverse proxy, DNS security, and storage security.

The users are at different locations, and Zscaler helps us to put the organization's central security controls on these roaming users.

The performance needs improvement. Some areas create performance issues and, depending on the use cases, require reconfiguration to perform again.

I've been using this solution for one and a half years.

It's on Zscaler cloud.

I find Zscaler to be very stable.

It's very scalable because it's the cloud version. We have 100,000 users across all levels.

I would give technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

We previously used Westcon-Comstor, which was on-premises, but with Zscaler, we moved to the cloud solution.

The initial setup was pretty easy. The deployment took about three months.

Our team of two members along with Zscaler's team implemented the solution.

We have seen an ROI. This is a well published product, and you get value for your money.

Because it's a cloud solution, we pay on a yearly basis. It is affordable and includes tech support and all features.

Each use case is different, and you have to evaluate it and take the risk.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Zscaler Internet Access at nine.

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. 

We use the tool to manage all end-user traffic. It's mainly for web filtering on every device, not for backend server traffic. 

Zscalar Internet Access is for Internet security, like an Internet security gateway. I like how it runs seamlessly in the background with a single sign-on. The controls you can have on devices for Internet security are good, and it doesn't impact speed wherever you're connected. Overall, I think it's very good so far.

The solution's pricing is on the higher side. It would be better if it could be lower. 

I have been using the product for a year. 

The product is quite stable. There were some challenges with speed and performance when connected to a different region, but once they fixed the policy and routed through our region, everything worked fine.

The tool should be scalable - we have many employees, and it's covering well. I can't comment on limitations for other companies with thousands of computers.

We pushed it through policy to all computers, so we didn't need people to do it manually. You need someone overseeing it but not heavily involved or specifically dedicated. It can be handled with other workloads.

The main reason for getting the solution was for better security, not for time or management savings. It didn't decrease effort for our security team, but it improved our overall security posture.

I like Zscaler Internet Access. We've been using it for a while, and it's working very well. However, we're still in the early stages of identifying the full solution and requirements.

I rate it a ten out of ten.