We performed a comparison between iboss and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"Yes, it is very stable. I have never seen it go down, not once."
"Users get direct secure access to applications over the internet."
"It does the job. What it is needed for. I can use it for VPN, I can use it for secure connections, I can use it as a firewall. So the solution does the job."
"The Live Logs are a cool feature. We can directly identify issues and divert user traffic."
"What I find most valuable in Zscaler Private Access is that it's a VPN. Its connectivity as a VPN is its most valuable feature."
"The product's most valuable features are cloud-based services and secure internet access. We don't have to set up any physical appliances."
"Sandboxing, DLP, and SSL inspection engine are the most valuable features of Zscaler SASE."
"Zscaler Private Access is a platform that eliminates the complexity of VPN configuration."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"The interface needs a bit of work."
"We would like to extend the SASE applications for Zscaler."
"There is improvement in enhancing proper manageability, policies, and logs. So, log management could be improved."
"While Zscaler supports client-initiated connections, it does not support server-initiated connections. This is a feature that Zscaler may consider adding in the future."
"It's an expensive solution."
"There could be more DLP-related features. Additionally, there needs to be flexibility for integrating ISP features."
"It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
iboss is ranked 16th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 8 reviews while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 3rd in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 34 reviews. iboss is rated 8.4, while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of iboss writes "Stable and quick to set up but needs more clear status information for end users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". iboss is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway and Fortinet FortiGate SWG, whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Cloudflare Access and Perimeter 81. See our Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange vs. iboss report.
See our list of best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.