We performed a comparison between Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management and Zscaler Internet Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, BitSight, OneTrust and others in IT Vendor Risk Management."The solution is user-friendly."
"The product helps us identify the vulnerabilities of internet-facing applications."
"I prefer BitSight due to its patch management capabilities. The score is a valuable feature. I have contacted the customer support through e-mail and their response rate is fast. I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Its customer service team responds quickly."
"Offers open ports from an external point of view."
"One feature that is valuable to me from an implementation point of view is that it's very easy to implement."
"Zscaler Internet Access's best feature is the granular policy controls."
"The most valuable feature of Zscaler Internet Access is that it is a consolidated solution, it comes with many features, such as DLP."
"There is no lag in service when accessing the internet."
"Tech support is good."
"SSL inspection is a valuable feature."
"The solution’s customer service is good."
"Zscaler Web Security protects our users in remote locations from internet threats - even if they are not connected to our network."
"Its factor analysis feature could be better."
"There may be room for improvement in the methodology for identifying findings, as occasional errors occur on the technical side."
"The solution’s benchmarking should be improved."
"At the moment, when the vulnerability score decreases, it remains the same for quite a while, even though issues are resolved in 24 hours."
"Data enrichment is the major issue."
"If they can also integrate with the multi-factor authentication to prompt users to do another, second-factor authentication, that would be ideal."
"The reporting functionality could be a bit easier to use. There is a reporting function, but it's quite hard to do any good reporting, from a user-management perspective. For example, if a department manager wants to know how his department is using the web, there is a way to get the data, but it's quite cumbersome to get it and show it well. And that's true for comparing between departments."
"In terms of user experience, it could be better."
"Sometimes it's not easy to use during large deployments of workstations."
"The tool should improve the predefined dictionaries."
"In terms of usage, here in the GCC, it's still growing a growing market, so the combination of DLP, data leak prevention, to a certain extent is fine. But what it requires is user-based access or role-based access. The solution needs to grow into that, which definitely takes time. There's not an easy way to integrate it, when you have a cloud-based solution."
"The price of the solution could be improved."
"Zscaler Internet Access could improve by adding a VPN feature."
More Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is ranked 2nd in IT Vendor Risk Management with 5 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 46 reviews. Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is rated 8.6, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management writes "User-friendly solution with robust patch management capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management is most compared with SecurityScorecard, RiskRecon, Microsoft Secure Score and UpGuard Vendor Risk, whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and FortiSASE .
We monitor all IT Vendor Risk Management 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.