Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy Reviews

I've been using Google virtual machines, Google FUSE. It has many, many products across the entire cloud platform. GCP can be used for data storage and for virtual machine creation.

It has some stack of products in it that I have found quite useful.

The solution is very easy to use. It's easy to navigate and to work with.

It's quite a flexible product.

We've found the solution to be scalable. 

The product is great. I can't think of a way it can be improved. There aren't any missing features. It's quite complete.

The solution could be more reasonably priced. We find it to be a bit expensive right now.

I've been using the solution for about a year or so. It hasn't been very long just yet.

The scalability of the solution is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so with relative ease. It's not hard at all.

I'm not sure how many users in total are on it in our organization. It might be between ten to 20 people or so. There aren't too many people on it currently.

I plan to continue to use it going forward. I can't speak to the company's plans for if it, and that includes increasing usage or not.

I've never had the chance to reach out to technical support, and therefore can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. I cannot evaluate them having had no direct interactions with them.

There isn't really an installation process for this solution. It's on the cloud. You don't need to implement anything. It's all just ready to go.

The solution could be cheaper. Right now, it's a bit expensive.

We've looked at the Oracle Cloud Platform and Amazon AWS and both services are good.

We're always using the latest version of the solution. It's always the latest as we are on the cloud deployment model and it auto-updates.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. Its capabilities have been very good overall and we've been very happy with it.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations. It's worked well for us.

We use it for software social media analytics. That software can call social media like Facebook, Instagram, and news online media. We call them and put them in the container. And then we analyze the data and display it on the dashboard. We use the GCP to run our server production.

We only use what we need to put in the application to create a server. We do not need to maintain the hardware. 

I think this product needs to shift the focus from our software, our solution, like social media analytics to our customers; not maintenance in the hardware. We focus on our business for the maintenance and infrastructure to develop the software. 

I have been using this solution for two years. 

We use it to up the server like the compute engine. For the compute engine, we just put the CPU with what I need, and then storage capacity what I need, and then just click, and it runs. We don't use it yet to have integration with other platforms or systems. 

We don't get any bugs in the software.

We do have plans to increase usage when our client base increases, we will increase the capacity, like the storage and the compute. Maybe in a year or two. 

We used to contact support to handle our problems at the beginning of our implementation. We're not so experienced with the system so we need their guidance. We are satisfied with the support. We have to pay to use technical support. There are a lot of charges. We open the ticket and then have to pay for it. It shouldn't be like that. We use the infrastructure and then we pay. We just input them for the system, we do not have to pay again.

The setup is of medium complexity. It is not too difficult, it is medium level to operate GCP.

It took only two days to set up the server. The server itself took three hours. Three hours to set up the server and then the deployment. We built the system over a long time. But to deploy we set the infrastructure like the server, firewall, in the GCP. It took five hours to deploy.

We deployed it ourselves.  

I would recommend GCP. We will focus to develop our system, our product, and it's a matter of whether or not the infrastructure can handle GCP.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

In the next release, I would like to see a machine learning system. 

Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy provides more control of our assets because normally when you're using Google Cloud, you have to use your Google email. IAP can control the assets that only come from the dedicated company or IP address.

It's a scalable solution that is easy to install as well.

The support can be more efficient. Google has different layers of support, like layer one, layer two, and layer three, but normally, the response from layer one is not very useful.

Google is not very capable when it comes to patching vulnerabilities. It would be nice if they could improve this security issue or CVE.

The stability needs to be improved for some services.

I've been using it for around five months because I just joined this company.

If you are talking about virtual machines, our customers would say that this solution is not so stable because sometimes Google Cloud has host errors. We haven't been able to get a good explanation from Google regarding this.

If you're using Kubernetes, it's quite stable, but if you are using VM, the system will typically reboot at least once every three months.

It's quite scalable.

If I ranked technical support from one to five, with five being the highest score, I would rank it at around three.

Technical support could be more efficient. Google has different layers of support, like layer one, layer two, and layer three, and the response from layer one is not very useful.

The installation should be easy.

I would recommend this product because with Google Cloud Platform, you can do a lot of applications that you cannot do with AWS. AWS is more useful for developers because it has moved from general usage.

I would rate Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy at six on a scale from one to ten because it still needs some improvements.

We primarily use the solution to assist our clients. One of our clients, for example, wanted their web application to be integrated.

The ability to measure access using the solution is quite helpful. It's very helpful, in particular, for clients.

The app provides ready-made services that we can talk to without issue.

We are looking for a more robust solution that allows seamless integration.

The initial setup was quite complex.

The solution needs some features. There a lot of new requirements, like seamless integration and real-time batch updates, that we would want that should be added in future releases.

We've only used the solution for a very short time. It's only been a few months.

The app is reliable. It's very stable. We haven't had issues with things like bugs or glitches. It hasn't crashed. It's been good.

The solution is quite scalable, as it is on the cloud. It is easy for a company to ramp up as needed.

We've never had to contact technical support. Everything we've needed in terms of answering queries or finding assistance is available online.

The initial setup is not straightforward. It was complex. We are expecting it to be more seamless.

The coding turned out to be quite difficult. We had to put the legacy EPAs in place. The access was hard to deal with. Networking restrictions, etc. were also causing us problems. There was a combination of implementation issues our organization had to deal with.

In the end, deployment took three weeks. 

We had our own team at our company that was able to deploy and maintain the solution.

We were a Google partner in the past, but we aren't anymore.

I would recommend the solution. I'd rate it seven out of ten overall. If the solution offered more features, we would rank it higher.