I would rate this solution as seven out of ten. 

The product is pretty good. They are the leader, as far as Gartner Magic Quadrant is concerned. The functionality and bundling are good, but the pricing isn't great. I think Netskope is competition because of their features and better pricing.

The competition offers more flexibility. This is a cloud solution, so a lot of banking customers and government customers are a bit reluctant to use it. Some of the competition has the on-premises model as well. Zscaler could also work on their bundling, packaging, and pricing.

I would suggest knowing the use cases beforehand. Many customers I've seen aren't entirely clear about their specific use cases. They often dive into the product first and then work backward to identify whether Zscaler Internet Access aligns with their needs. Understanding your use cases is essential; it serves as a foundation for determining if Zscaler Internet Access is the right solution. If the required capabilities are already available, or if a few API integrations or lines of code can sustain the existing solution, that's worth considering. This advice isn't exclusive to Zscaler, but I've witnessed clients who become uncertain because they lack the necessary set of use cases that would justify their investment.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten for two reasons, namely, the China issue for the improvement section and the pricing is expensive. I am not sure about the exact price, but it is expensive.

Make use of the Zscaler Client Connector as much as you can, with all of the functionality that comes with it. Also, do not allow the users to disable the Zscaler Client Connector, because then you don't know if traffic is actually going through Zscaler or not. If it's always on, you know that if something is not working, it's your policies that are doing something to the traffic. We used to make it possible for a user to disable the Zscaler Client Connector, which then made it impossible for us, as the team that troubleshoots problems, to know if the traffic was actually going through Zscaler or not. If you don't have that control, you don't know where the problem is. Now, at least we know that it's either on the client or it's on Zscaler or it's on the destination that they're trying to reach.

As for saving time with this system versus deploying and managing traditional network security hardware, it depends on how you build your management of the solution. We have opted for a solution where we manage everything centrally. We have one IT team that manages all of the Zscaler Internet Access policies and settings. But there is an option, and it's one of the strengths of Zscaler, to delegate control of parts or all of the solution to other teams. For instance, you could have URL Filtering policies that are managed by a local IT team in a given country. We don't do that. We manage everything from one team and we control everything, for our whole organization, from this management platform. We control the forwarding policies, the application access policies, the URL Filtering policies—pretty much everything.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to those who want to start using it.

It's a cloud based solution, so Zscaler provides everything needed to set up and start using it, without complex requirements.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It is very easy to use.

We are an end-user. We may be a future partner.

It is good for a small environment of 80 to 100 users. I'm not sure if it works for very large organizations. This solution requires less maintenance and makes server access easy - instead of, for example, standalone VPN access.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I would rate the product a seven out of ten. I haven't seen any unique competitive advantage for ZIA over its competitors. ZIA's offerings are offered by competitors as well. However, the product has good security features. However, I wouldn't recommend this product to organizations that require high-security features. I would recommend Palo Alto in those cases. 

I like Zscaler Internet Access a lot.

There are some sites it fails to find and block, causing such sites to get away from Zscaler Internet Access.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We acquired a customer for optimization. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

My advice would be to ensure that you have a good implementer and reseller who can provide guidance. The reseller should be aligned with those who work in security and needs to be aware of anything that might need an exception that needs to be created. This will help avoid any surprises when the solution is live. The other important aspect to consider is training.

Overall, I would rate Zscaler at eight on a scale from one to ten.

Try it, test it out, and make sure it works for you. It is not going to work for everybody because it is not a zero-cost solution. However, it does provide significant benefits in terms of its latency and capability to inspect your traffic as well as keeping your customer data secure.

It hasn't saved us time as compared to deploying and managing traditional network security hardware because we already had everything in place from a traditional standpoint. We take security very seriously. Security is paramount to what we do. We cannot, under any circumstances, allow our customers' data to be compromised. So, we have all the correct things in place from a traditional standpoint. We are now modernizing, and Zscaler Internet Access allows us to do that. However, we will not compromise at all. We have to move slowly to it.

It has not reduced the time that we spend managing security policies. The security policies used on Zscaler Internet Access are the same ones that we used with our previous technologies.

It has not really reduced the number of infected devices in our organization because we already had preventions in place with other technologies. We didn't previously have any infections. 

I would rate Zscaler Internet Access as nine out of 10. It is a very good solution.

Each use case is different, and you have to evaluate it and take the risk.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Zscaler Internet Access at nine.

We are not using the solution for data loss prevention.

When you select this product, test it with other tools running on your machine to ensure there are no compatibility issues between different products.

I would rate it as nine out of 10.

If you want to establish the right controls from a web security perspective, it's one of the best products in the market. Again, opting for the solution depends on the particular requirement. If you are looking for a solution for banking services, then, you should go with Symantec Blue Coat for a better DLP solution. But if you need a mix of VPN, CASB, and Web Security Gateway, then Zscaler is the better solution.

I rate the solution as an eight out of ten.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

Although the solution is easy to configure, there is good value in spending two or three days with an expert that can save a lot of time and effort setting things up in order for you to get real value out of it quickly.

I would recommend Zscaler for traveling users but FortiGate for in-house users. I would give Zscaler a rating of eight out of ten.

Overall, it is a secure platform.

I actually interviewed with Zscaler to work with them because I have been impressed with their technology overall, especially over Palo Alto Networks technology who is their competitor and has a SaaS solution as well. From the top to bottom, Zscaler Internet Access is a great security product that protects my end users and remote users in the cloud.

If you want total cost of ownership and zero-trust architecture, Zscaler is the right solution to fit the needs of any environment.

I would rate the solution as 10 out of 10.

I'd rate hte solution seven out of ten. 

We use other similar products and find them to be a bit more preferable to Zscaler. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I rate Zscaler Internet Access eight out of 10.

I rate Zscaler Internet Access a nine out of ten. Love the product.

I rate the product a nine out of ten. 

My advice for people looking into implementing Zscaler Internet Access is that it's quite stable. Its features are quite mature, so I would recommend for people to go for the implementation of the solution.

Zscaler Internet Access is deployed on the cloud, particularly on Zcaler's cloud: the ZIA. It's a SaaS solution.

Zscaler is a great solution. We have a very good representative here in Honduras and it was easy to set up. It's a very strong solution with the cloud infrastructure that meets our needs and most of the needs of our users. We are very happy with the solution.

I'm an end-user. 

I am dealing with the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. The only downside is that it is so expensive. 

I'm a customer and end-user. 

I'm not sure of the exact version of the solution.

Zscaler is a cloud service provider, so they are hosting their services on their own cloud. They might be using the public cloud. I'm not sure. However, it's not an on-premise solution. It's a cloud-based proxy.

You need to perform that due diligence. You need to understand your use cases, including the number of users and how many are working from home or roaming, et cetera. You need to understand hosting, and how to protect servers. There's a lot of understanding you need to have before you can begin implementing anything.  

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

My advice, generally, is that if a client has a growth prospect with an increasing number of employees moving across the globe, then Zscaler advises having a product that is scalable and fast. By fast, I mean it has low latency, making it very scalable. Zscaler Internet Access is a completely cloud-based product and is highly scalable. It is a reliable solution to have in your IT stack. 

Overall, I would rate Zscaler an eight out of ten. Zscaler Internet Access is highly scalable and has low latency, making it one of the most reliable products with good market support and presence. I rated it an eight and not a ten because there are a couple of constraints in scaling certain things. For example, some customers, such as federal institutions of the US, state of clutter, or some banks, want an on-premise solution. They want more control because Cloud will always have a security issue somewhere or the other, and Zscaler Internet Access does not have an on-prem solution. Also, when you increase the features, it does lag a bit, which should not happen.

Pay attention to the Zscaler recommended best practices. Don't try to figure it out on your own. Go with what they say to do.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I rate Zscaler Internet Access an eight out of ten. 

We use the ZIA Business Suite, a version of Zscaler Internet Access.

We use the public cloud deployment model.

The solution is very straightforward. That's what we like about the cloud - all the capabilities that are there, and that are available immediately.

There are things customers really have to have before they integrate the Zscaler. They need to understand ADFS and have it integrated properly into their own network. As long as the customers that you work with do the work required of them before integrating Zscaler, then it's seamless. The problems we encounter happen when customers don't get to the point they need to in order to take it on as a product. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

We don't have a direct relationship with Zscaler as we use it in a managed service. 

I'd advise new users to be sure that they have good architects to integrate. It's quite complicated.

Sometimes the complexity of integrating with legacy and other complex setups is a chore.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's easy to deploy and easy to use. There's a lot less administrative overhead so you won't require a very big team to manage it. It's the biggest benefit.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

Zscaler Internet Access is very good, and I would recommend it to others. I would give it a rating of eight out of ten.

We're just a customer.

I would recommend other users also have a glance at other solutions. Options like Prisma Access by Palo Alto or Check Point may be ideal, depending on the needs of the business.

Zscaler seems easy to understand and easy to use, however, there is probably some room for improvements. At my former company, we were using Check Point. This was also pretty good. Zscaler seems more modern, however, I'm referencing an experience from some 10 years ago.

Overall, I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

The solution's great, but you have to put it into context because of the pricing and the way it basically protects the device from anywhere. It is really more meant from highly distributed organizations, for organizations that have a lot of work from home and those with road warrior workers. That's what it is designed for.

People wanting to use the solution must not rely much on predefined dictionaries. I would recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

In summary, this is a good product and I completely recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Understand your use case and be sure of your technical ability to implement the policies.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

We were integrated with Azure Identity. We are not sure if the client has their own data center or what they are using in that backend, or which cloud provider.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Check if a product like this makes sense for you. And look at the specifics: what you need in terms of security and what features you would like to have in it. Zscaler is one solution. It's a good solution, but it doesn't do everything. First of all, analyze a few solutions and make a demo. Without a demo, I do not recommend moving forward, because any security solution comes with a price. There is also the financial price, to know if that is okay for your company. Usually Zscaler works best for companies that have users that do not stay in an office. They have road warriors. I would recommend it for companies that have a lot of users moving from here to there.

I would rate Zscaler as eight out of ten. It's not an ideal solution, one of the things is that I do not have my IP fully inside it. For example, you have countries where they don't have a lot of presence and then sometimes they go to another country where they have a presence or data center. When you come back to the other country, and you have to open a fiber, it can be geographically restrictive. I find my country and am going through by neighborhood. When I come back to my country, I cannot see it because I'm geographically restricted. I'm not part of that country, so that's one reason Zscaler isn't ideal.

With MSS service providers, they prefer to have an on-prem OPEX-based deployment model. Like telecom providers or data center service providers, they buy the service and roll it out to customers or sell it to their own customers for a monthly fee. We have a mix of clients who prefer to have private clouds and hybrid models.

There is competition, with, for example, iboss and Fortinet in the region. iboss is hardware-free but the company is young and still growing. It's not there yet. Zscaler, however, the way they have matured the market and have become a mature model, makes them preferred over other vendors or other brands.

In terms of implementing Zscaler, it's quite straightforward, but even having a straightforward technology like Zscaler requires a consultative approach of which are the critical areas where the service needs to be deployed first. That needs to be studied as per the cybersecurity guidelines so that the right protocols are implemented.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten. 

They still have some features to integrate. The solution is still evolving.

My advice to other users would be to determine if the reporting meets their requirements. They should get their whitelists, blacklists, groups and active directory set up properly before trying to implement it because it has a very strong integration with the active directory. Therefore, if you have your active directory well set up, you can classify your users and create groups as to who can go where and who can do what on the internet.

If I have to rate this product, I will give it a nine out of ten - simply because I never give anything a ten.

I'm currently consulting clients, and have worked with this solution extensively in the past. Most of my clients are moving from a private cloud to a hybrid cloud deployment model.

The way Zscaler has shaped their product is very good. Now they need to expand the coverage and to have a more global service. For mid-players and sometimes top-players, multiplying the numbers of providers to build an integrated solution is a complex endeavor. If Zscaler expanded their services, that would remove some complexity,

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

We can manage our IT rules and policies using online portal.

It was also one of four other products I believe but the Zscaler I can say that for bandwidth control, it is good, so we are not using at the moment data loss prevention feature so I cannot comment on that, but I believe, when you use Zscaler, you are not protected from all malware and malicious attacks, so you may need another tool just to cover these gaps. Zscaler is not enough for advanced protection. You need an additional tool.

Bandwidth control, reporting, and visibility are good but the cloud-based and the advanced protection aren't so great so I would give it a six out of ten.