Most Helpful Review
Use Cisco Web Security Appliance? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Web Security Appliance vs. Zscaler Internet Access and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
408,459 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
The most valuable feature is that we can use it as a proxy.
This solution offers categorization for YouTube and other specific applications from Facebook to WhatsApp, which can be controlled whether it's on mobile or PC.
The technical support is good. It is reactive and the documentation is very specific and very useful.
The setup was very easy and straightforward.
The scanning feature is impressive, because they do not introduce a big latency to the traffic.
Zscaler Web Security protects our users in remote locations from internet threats - even if they are not connected to our network.
The most valuable feature is bandwidth control.
The solution offers a distributed organization to master and to control all of the endpoints.
The best thing about Zscaler Internet Access is the website filtering. In the UAE it's quite an important feature because most of the malware comes through the SQL injection and through downloads from websites. Zscaler helps protect against that.
The initial setup was straightforward. The biggest thing for us was to build our own policies. The deployment itself was only a few hours.
All internet access flows through the Zscaler proxy, regardless of whether people are in office or remote. I have greater control site access and I minimize the number of compromises that we experience to almost none.
Whether you are in a hotel somewhere, or in Africa, it does not matter. You will get the Zscaler protection presence anywhere.
They need a better graphical interface, and they need a better ISE mechanism.
Technical support needs to be improved because they take a very long time and there is no communication or notification.
The FTD 21 model's Firepower Threat Defense does not have the multi-instance feature for the virtualization with the physical equipment.
The solution is not very compatible with other products.
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.
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.
It also needs better integration with other applications as well. There are some restrictions.
Zscaler should provide adjacent services, which would be complementary to their current offering that could to be more pragmatic for a customer. For example, if you take Akamai, you get multiple sets of services, all depending on the customer and the strategy and the complexity and the problems. In some areas, they are more varied in terms of coverage.
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.
In every cloud service in the world, you have multiple upstream internet providers to create diversity so that if one of your providers fails, your network just continues. In South Africa, there is only one upstream provider, and that's not right. That that's a problem.
It needs better integration with other applications. It takes a fair amount of regular activity to apply the by-passes because it is very strict in its restrictions and frequently you have to go in and open things up to allow the workforce to work.
The pricing is an issue. It is expensive if you have all of your users in the same location. It is expensive compared to other firewalls on the market.
Pricing and Cost Advice
I know from the manager that the price is too high and that other solutions offer the same features for less.
When you compare the price of this solution to the price of FortiGate, it's high.
The pricing is too high.
Our monthly fee is around R3000.
Roughly, we might spend $70,000 a month on the solution. We don't pay for anything beyond the standard licensing fee.
The pricing is an issue. It is expensive compared to other firewalls on the market.
out of 25 in Web Security Gateways
Average Words per Review
out of 25 in Web Security Gateways
Average Words per Review
Compared 100% of the time.
Compared 27% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Also Known As
|Cisco WSA, Cisco Web Security||ZIA|
For security, your network needs malware protection, application visibility and control, acceptable use policy controls, insightful reporting and secure mobility. Cisco offers this protection, all on a single platform: the Cisco Web Security Appliance (WSA).
Zscaler Web Security provides unmatched security, visibility and control, going beyond the basics of web content filtering. Delivered in the cloud, Zscaler includes award-winning web security integrated with our robust network security platform that features advanced threat protection, real-time analytics and forensics. You'll get protection across every user, location and device, including laptops, smartphones, tablets and Internet of Things devices.
For more details:
Learn more about Cisco Web Security Appliance
Learn more about Zscaler Internet Access
|New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Caixa Seguradora||Ulster-Greene ARC, BanRegio, HDFC, Ralcorp Holdings Inc., British American Tobacco, Med America Billing Services Inc., Lanco Group, Aquafil, Telefonica, Swisscom, Brigade Group|
No Data Available
Software R&D Company29%
Comms Service Provider16%