We performed a comparison between Safe-T Secure Application Access and Zscaler Internet Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenVPN, Fortinet, Cisco and others in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN."The solution has good performance."
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"Safe-T is very good for users because it has plug-in for Outlook."
"If you want a very flexible system that you can easily integrate, and develop interfaces for it or plug-ins to other application environments, it's probably the most flexible"
"the security level is very high. After we tested it and checked all the security aspects of the product, we found that it's highly secure."
"It's easy to use over the web. A user who is not in the office can use it and securely insert files."
"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."
"In terms of management and visibility, there is a single panel where you can configure the policies for your entire organisation worldwide."
"It is easy to set up the solution."
"We use ZIA for outbound internet connectivity. The internet traffic of on-prem users will be directed to the ZIA cloud for security checks and web filtering."
"The solution is scalable and stable."
"Zscaler Internet Access's roaming user feature is most valuable and is much better compared to other secure web gateways."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to drop packets."
"Zscaler Internet Access has helped us reduce the time that we spend managing security policies by about four hours a week. We can use this time to focus on other things, especially the IT team."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"One important thing that we haven't found in this product is the ability to provide a read-only view for documents. Also, the ability for the customer to add annotations to these documents."
"The Outlook agent is not working well for installing it in the entire office."
"Zscaler Internet Access can improve by adding traffic filtering based on the DNS."
"Do not expect to pay for the service and start using it, like Gmail. Zscaler requires a proper implementation to be done to make it successful."
"Zscaler needs to add client-to-client communication. It's always client-to-server communication. The cloud and branch connectors could be improved because we're still dependent on traditional firewalls. They should eliminate this. They should also provide WAN devices should to compete with the SD-WAN solutions also."
"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."
"In terms of user experience, it could be better."
"The interface for administration could be better. They should upgrade the management portal."
"One thing that they could improve is the ability to import rules from other platforms."
"The price of the solution could be improved."
Earn 20 points
Safe-T Secure Application Access is ranked 44th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 46 reviews. Safe-T Secure Application Access is rated 7.8, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Safe-T Secure Application Access writes "The architecture is open to integration and development, making the product very flexible". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". Safe-T Secure Application Access is most compared with , 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 Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.