Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is used to provide secure internet access and Zero Trust based application access for enterprise users, especially in the banking sector. The platform enforces security policies for outbound internet traffic, including URL filtering, SSL inspection, threat prevention, and Zscaler Private Access to provide secure, VPN-less access to internal applications. Instead of using traditional VPN, applications were segmented and published through Zscaler. Access is granted based on user identity and device posture, allowing users to access only specific applications rather than the full network.

Some of the best features of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform are centered around security, user experience, and the simplicity of deployment. One key feature is Zero Trust access, where users receive access to only specific applications instead of the full network, which significantly reduces the attack surface. Another important feature is the use of app connectors, which establish outbound connections only, so there is no need to expose internal applications to the internet, improving the overall security posture. Zscaler Private Access also provides identity-based access control where access decisions are based on user identity, device posture, and policies rather than IP address. From a user experience perspective, one of the best features is seamless access without VPN, removing the need for manual connections and improving performance. Additionally, it offers application segmentation for granular access control, scalability through cloud-native architecture, and integration with identity providers such as Active Directory and Azure AD. These features deliver secure, fast, and user-friendly access to internal applications.

A significant improvement in user experience occurred after moving from traditional VPN to Zscaler Private Access. Initially with VPN, users faced issues including slow connectivity, especially during peak hours, full network access which increased security risk, frequent VPN disconnects, and login delays. After implementing Zscaler Private Access, the feedback was largely positive. Users experienced faster and more stable access to applications since the traffic is routed directly to the application instead of the entire network, eliminating the need to manually connect to the VPN. Access became seamless in the background, improving overall security as users could access only specific applications rather than the full network. From an IT and security perspective, there was a reduced attack surface, better visibility, and controlled use based on user identity, as well as fewer support tickets related to connectivity issues. The transition improved both user experience and security posture, and adoption was smooth after initial onboarding.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access, is very strong, though there are a few areas where improvements can be made. One challenge observed is around initial troubleshooting and visibility. While Zscaler Private Access provides logs, it can sometimes take time to pinpoint the exact cause of access issues, especially in complex environments with multiple policies and identity integration. Another area is the dependency on identity and connector health. Since Zscaler Private Access is heavily reliant on app connectors and identity providers, any issues with these components can impact user access, making proper monitoring critical. During the initial setup, policy configuration and application onboarding require careful planning, especially for larger environments with many applications. These challenges are manageable with proper design and monitoring. Overall, the platform delivers strong security and user experience.

I would recommend a few improvements, especially around user interface, reporting, and troubleshooting experience. From a user interface perspective, while the platform is powerful, the policy configuration and navigation can feel complex, especially for new users. A more simplified and intuitive layout for policy mapping and application access would help reduce the learning curve. In terms of reporting, Zscaler Private Access provides logs, but having more built-in customizable dashboards and analytics would be very helpful. Better visibility into user access patterns, application performance, and real-time troubleshooting insights would improve operational efficiency. From a support and troubleshooting standpoint, it would be beneficial to have more granular centralized visibility, allowing for quick end-to-end tracing of a user request from authentication to application access without switching between multiple views. These improvements would make the platform even more efficient, especially for large-scale enterprise environments.

I have been working with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform for around three or more years, gaining hands-on experience with Zscaler and Zscaler Private Access, including policy creations, optimization, SSL inspection and configuration, traffic forwarding using PAC and client connectors, troubleshooting user access issues, and integrating identity providers such as Active Directory and Azure AD.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is very stable, especially in enterprise environments. Being a cloud-native platform with a globally distributed infrastructure, consistent performance and high availability are experienced for user access. In day-to-day operations, there have been no major outages impacting users, and the platform performs reliably with stable access to applications. Occasional minor issues can occur, such as connector-related or identity integration dependencies, but these are usually manageable with proper monitoring and redundancy. Deploying multiple app connectors ensures high availability, and monitoring identity providers helps avoid authentication issues. Overall, from this experience, it is a stable and production-ready platform suitable for enterprise use.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is highly scalable, primarily because it is built on a cloud-native, globally distributed architecture. Scaling is straightforward from a user experience perspective. When more users or applications are onboarded, there is no need to provision traditional hardware as in traditional VPN setups. The Zscaler cloud automatically handles the increasing user traffic and load. For application scalability, additional app connectors are deployed as needed, with connectors placed closer to applications, whether on-premises or in cloud environments, ensuring high availability and load distribution. Adding new users is simple through identity integration, and policies can be applied centrally without infrastructure changes. Scaling has been observed from a smaller user base to larger deployments without many major architecture changes, which is a significant advantage. Overall, Zscaler Private Access provides elastic scalability, making it well-suited for growing enterprise environments.

The experience with Zscaler customer support has been good, especially for enterprise-level support. Multiple support cases have been raised mainly around policy behavior, access issues, and initial deployment troubleshooting. In most cases, the response time has been within SLA. The support engineers are technically knowledgeable, particularly for Zscaler Private Access related issues, providing clear guidance and documentation for troubleshooting. For critical issues, the escalation process works well, and timely support is received when needed. In some complex scenarios, troubleshooting can take longer, especially when it involves multiple components such as identity providers or connectors, but overall, the support experience has been reliable.

I would rate the customer support eight out of ten. The main reason is that the support team is technically strong, responsive within SLA, and helpful during troubleshooting, particularly for Zscaler Private Access related issues. However, in some complex scenarios involving multiple integrations, the resolution time can be slightly longer, which is why the rating remains at eight rather than a full ten.

Before implementing Zscaler Private Access, the primary solution for remote access was traditional VPN. While VPN provided connectivity, it had several limitations. Users received full network access, which increased the risk of lateral movement and security exposure. There were also issues with slow performance, frequent disconnects, and scalability challenges, especially during peak usage. The main reason for switching to Zscaler Private Access was to move toward a Zero Trust architecture where access is granted based on user identity and application-level policies rather than network-level access. With Zscaler Private Access, the need for VPN was eliminated, access was restricted to only specific applications instead of the entire network, and both security and user experience were improved. Overall, the shift was driven by the need for better security, scalability, and seamless user access, which Zscaler Private Access effectively addressed.

One additional aspect to highlight is the ease of deployment and scalability that Zscaler Private Access provides. Since Zscaler Private Access works on the outbound connection model using app connectors, there was no need to open any inbound ports or make major changes to the existing infrastructure. This made the deployment much faster and more secure compared to traditional solutions. Another important aspect is the tight integration with identity providers such as Active Directory or Azure AD, allowing for the enforcement of consistent identity-based access policies across users. From an operational perspective, Zscaler Private Access provides good visibility and logging, which helps in quickly troubleshooting issues and understanding user access patterns. Beyond just security, it also simplified operations and reduced the complexity of managing remote access.

A positive return on investment has been realized after implementing Zscaler Private Access. One of the most noticeable improvements was in reduced support effort. A clear drop in VPN-related help desk tickets occurred, especially around connectivity and login issues, which saved significant troubleshooting time for the support team. In terms of time savings, since users no longer manually connect to the VPN, access became seamless, improving user productivity, especially for remote users. From an infrastructure perspective, the need to maintain and scale traditional VPN hardware was eliminated, which reduced both costs and operational overhead. In measurable terms, approximately thirty-five to forty-five percent reduction in connectivity-related support tickets was observed, along with faster issue resolution due to better visibility and improved user productivity due to stable and direct application access. Overall, the platform helped save time, reduce operational effort, and improve security, all contributing to a strong return on investment.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform follows a subscription-based licensing model, typically based on the number of users and the modules enabled, such as Zscaler Private Access or Zscaler Internet Access. In terms of pricing, it may appear on the higher side initially compared to traditional VPN solutions, but when the overall value is considered, it justifies the cost. There is minimal setup cost since it is a cloud-delivered platform, eliminating the need to invest in additional hardware such as VPN gateways or maintain infrastructure. From a business perspective, benefits are observed including reduced infrastructure and maintenance costs, lower support overhead due to fewer VPN-related issues, and improved security posture, which is critical for enterprise environments. Overall, while licensing is subscription-based, the platform provides a strong return on investment in terms of security, scalability, and operational efficiency.

Before choosing Zscaler, a few other options in the market were evaluated. Some of the key solutions reviewed included Palo Alto Prisma Access and Netskope Private Access, in addition to some traditional VPN-based solutions. During the evaluation, factors were focused on including ease of deployment and scalability, user experience, granularity of access control, and overall Zero Trust capabilities. Zscaler stood out mainly because of its cloud-native architecture and maturity in Zscaler Zero Trust implementation, especially for Zscaler Private Access. It provided true application-level segmentation, which offered a seamless user experience without a VPN, had strong integration with identity providers, and was relatively simpler to deploy and manage at scale. While other solutions were strong, Zscaler provided a better balance of security, performance, and operational simplicity, making it the preferred choice.

The recommendation would be to start with a clear understanding of the existing application architecture and user access patterns before implementing Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access. A phased rollout is strongly recommended, starting with a few critical applications and a small group of users, monitoring the behavior, and then gradually expanding. This helps identify any policy gaps or access issues early on. Proper integrations with identity providers such as Azure AD or Okta are very important, as Zscaler Private Access relies heavily on identity-based access. Another key point is to invest time in policy design. Defining application segments and access policies correctly will make a huge difference in long-term stability and user experience. Continuous monitoring and tuning based on logs and user feedback are essential to fully optimize the solution.

Overall, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access, has been a strong and reliable solution for enabling secure access without any need for traditional VPNs. It has significantly improved both security posture and user experience in deployments. The platform is scalable, easy to manage once properly configured, and aligns well with modern Zero Trust principles. From this experience, with proper planning and policy design, it delivers great value to an organization. There is still room for improvement in areas such as user interface simplicity and faster resolution for complex cases, but overall, it is a very solid and mature solution. I would rate this review nine out of ten.

I work with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform as a user. We are an HCM company, and we wanted to utilize it as a user because it is our own product company. We have been developing the customer product because the HCM product is focusing on workforce management and payroll. We have been trying to use it as a user itself, not for deployment for different companies.

If we speak about the use cases for Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, I can use the product for various purposes, not just one. There are multiple use cases because it is basically the HCM product. We have a huge database of customers, and it has a different case-to-case basis. Our model for deployment was huge with multiple use cases. In this case, it is very difficult for me to specify or identify one particular use case. I just log in with SSO and make sure that Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is able to protect it appropriately. It is not one use case; it is multiple business models we have deployed.

The benefit is the accessibility. When we were using Cisco, especially when we were focusing on VPN, we had multiple issues. Even with the login, we also had an issue. Since we started using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, it has auto-configuration, and wherever we have deployed the auto-configuration, we have not encountered any problem. The company is not looking for any specific change or transition from Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform to a different product. Even during deployment, the referral responses were quite appropriate. That is the reason why we have a preference, and I still rate it as good to go.

The deployment is already progressing. We completed deployment last month.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform probably needs to be more efficient because scanning takes a lot of time. Some vulnerabilities create issues, and when we wanted to identify the source of the vulnerabilities, specifically focusing on mobile ID and related areas, it was unable to provide assistance. However, according to discussions with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, they said that by the end of mid-2026, they are exploring these features, and probably those features can be incorporated or embedded into this particular system. That is the only major negative point.

In terms of responses, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is good. In terms of controlling vulnerability, it is good. The only cons I have noticed is that it is a bit slower, and sometimes it is unable to identify the source. These are the key areas for improvement.

We started somewhere in March 2025, and it is going to be a year in March.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is very stable. I am using it on my PC, and I do not see any issues coming to me for the past one year. I have never seen any issues.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is scalable. The only limitation I was mentioning is that it was unable to identify the sources of vulnerability, which they are going to embed by the mid of this year. That is what the promise they have made in their plan. After that, it is scalable.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform support is good. We have managed to find 24/7 support region-wise. We have North America, we have Asia Pacific region, Japan, China, New Zealand, and Australia. We managed to identify the 24/7 support. They have provided the numbers and contact supports, and it is almost immediate. I would rate support from Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform from zero to ten points, with ten being the best. I can say seven to eight.

I have been working with Cisco XDR and Cisco Secure Access. We were using Cisco XDR and Cisco as an endpoint security, especially on VPN. Recently, we have moved from Cisco, and we have gone to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Currently, we are using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Cisco was decommissioned in late 2024, and early 2025, we moved to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform.

I used Trend Micro sometime in 2022. We were using CrowdStrike until 2024. We replaced it with Prisma. The reason we made the replacement from Prisma to Wiz is because of the cost. I can tell that it is a saving of about half a million dollars a year.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is very easy to deploy with no complication. We did our implementation in-house. We have our own team and our own security team, and it was being assisted by Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform directly. We did not engage any vendor.

We did our implementation in-house. We have our own team and our own security team, and it was being assisted by Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform directly. We did not engage any vendor.

I see return on investment here. When I see that I am trying to cut costs, for example, even when replacing Prisma, we have managed to save about over half a million dollars a year. I can see some of our own products where Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform has been deployed, and I can say over 50,000 US dollars I am able to save a month as compared to the other products. Definitely I will consider this as ROI.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is much, much cheaper when comparing price.

I have been working with Cisco XDR and Cisco Secure Access. We were using Cisco XDR and Cisco as an endpoint security, especially on VPN. Recently, we have moved from Cisco, and we have gone to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Currently, we are using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Cisco was decommissioned in late 2024, and early 2025, we moved to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform.

I used Trend Micro sometime in 2022. We were using CrowdStrike until 2024. We replaced it with Prisma. The reason we made the replacement from Prisma to Wiz is because of the cost. I can tell that it is a saving of about half a million dollars a year.

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform's SSL Inspection feature helps to improve security. The threat intelligence capability is true and important. When we are scanning all our applications, especially focusing on application security, we are using the product Invicti. While we are doing vulnerability management prior to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform and this SSL Inspection feature, subsequently what we have noticed is that the vulnerabilities, especially the security bugs that were coming prior to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, were about 20,000 to 22,000. Subsequently, after this, there is a huge reduction. It has come down more than 40 percent. That is definitely an advantage over the previous product.

It helps for the remote workforce. Ours is 100 percent remote. All the accesses have definitely improved because we are also using an SSO platform. Subsequently, what we have been noticing with this feature is the security. My job is to ensure that security is scanned from across the cloud region, across application security, and across on-premises. With this deployment, I have seen the security being in absolute control. We have not seen any incident being reported for the past one year.

We are not getting into too many details internally for metrics, except for the scanning and the results that we have been monitoring. I would rate this review eight out of ten.

Our main use case for Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is our information security risk management.

I would say we have excellent account management, smooth marketplace engagement, and processing in how my team or organization uses Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, even from a procurement or high-level perspective.

From a cost perspective, I would say fair market value, and then from an efficiency perspective, I notice a very good user experience, which is easy to use with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform.

When I say very good user experience, I have received feedback from my internal stakeholders that makes it easy to use, just very simple and intuitive.

I believe Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform can be improved, but I have no specific feedback based on my procurement experience. There is nothing I would change at this time regarding needed improvements.

I have actually not known how long I have been using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. I did a renewal in mid-year.

I rate it a seven because I am still working through some kinks from a performance and a support perspective.

I cannot comment on the best features Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform offers, as I am in procurement.

All three features—secure remote access, user authentication, and data protection—stand out to me from my experience in procurement. I advise others looking into using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform to give it a try. I provided this review with an overall rating of seven.

In terms of our main use cases, the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform was typically introduced to replace our traditional VPN methods, and Zscaler Internet Access was used for secure internet access for all users.

The platform offers advanced threat protection features and embedded AI/ML capabilities, making it more proactive in blocking threats. We can create different types of controls such as access controls, file type controls, and cloud app controls to manage user access.

The solution is beneficial for remote work environments by providing extra security features that VDI cannot provide.

Data loss prevention features are available, particularly network data loss prevention. We can create various regex and other rules in Zscaler DLP.

The platform saves workforce hours and integrates with various tools and technologies, which has increased our security posture. We can integrate with SIEM, our AV platform, XDR, and EDR.

There are connection errors sometimes when users move from one location to another location, which can cause latency issues.

Regarding the initial setup and deployment, there should be an export option from older tools to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. This export function would eliminate the need to start from basics. Some rules should be exportable and directly importable to the platform. Additionally, more automation efforts could be included.

I have been working with the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform for more than four years.

The implementation process is moderate but overall manageable.

Netskope is a similar tool to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Both are similar tools, but the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform proved to be better. The Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform has global coverage and low latency regarding support, and it provides a robust Zero Trust architecture. Netskope provides flexible pricing and has granular visibility, and it surpasses the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform in cloud security capabilities.

The implementation takes approximately six months to complete.

The platform is cost-effective regarding overall benefits. We don't have to purchase many components such as load balancers and proxy servers that were necessary in traditional setups. Being a cloud platform, many aspects are managed by the cloud, making it more beneficial.

The Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is the industry's first zero-trust SaaS built on an AI platform. The platform deserves a rating of 9 out of 10 due to its extensive features and ease of administration.

We are not resellers. We are utilizing it. We come from consulting firms, providing it to customers along with services, operational support, implementation support, and more. It involves various users in our organization.

I find it to be good. The solution is cloud-based with the latest inspection engines, which I find to be amazing. We are less dependent on data centers and device management, which reduces our efforts significantly.

It improves our device management, data center management, and updating devices. We need fewer engineers for this management, and it reduces time and efforts for data center management, device upgrades, and IT support.

There is not much room for improvement. We are users and operational engineers, so we might not have the insight that solution providers have when they compare different solutions. They might be able to identify if something is missing with Zscaler.

I have been using it for three years now.

I would rate its stability as a ten out of ten. It is very high, and it is good.

It is instant and very flexible according to requirements.

Customer service is good, you could say. I would rate it a nine out of ten. Sometimes, support takes time since the solution has some bugs that need fixing.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing Zscaler. It was proposed, and we used it.

The initial setup is easy and user-friendly, engineer-friendly, and environment-friendly.

There is nothing announced. It is a third-party issue.

The ROI is good.

We did not evaluate other options; this was proposed, and we used it.

I recommend the solution. It's amazing. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We primarily use Zscaler SASE as a web filter to have secure internet connectivity for all our endpoints, users, and branch offices. The agent installed on all endpoints controls individual internet access, ensuring that only approved sites and applications are available for end users. It also blocks access to any website identified as a threat or security-compromised. Additionally, it is used to enable zero trust network configuration, allowing users from their homes to connect to Zscaler Zero Trust network using Zscaler private access component.

Zscaler has positively impacted our organization by providing a seamless configuration for remote access needs. Our employees are satisfied with the accessibility, as it eliminates the need for a VPN, allowing users to access required resources from anywhere seamlessly. This enhances user experience significantly.

The most valuable features of Zscaler SASE include web filtering, application control, and the private access configuration. The private access configuration is particularly valuable as it allows user-based access control, limiting access to only what is needed for specific users and applications.

The connectivity monitoring part should be included in the core license without any extra charges. As a user, I should be able to see how seamlessly end users are connecting, but currently, this feature is an add-on that requires an additional license fee.

I have been working with Zscaler SASE for approximately over a year now.

The stability of Zscaler SASE has been rated an eight out of ten. There have been issues with some of the edge networks where users were unable to access the internet, which is why it's not rated higher.

The scalability of Zscaler SASE is rated a ten. As an agile cloud solution, it is easily scalable by adding licenses. However, since we are not a company that frequently adds a lot of users, scalability is not a primary concern for us at this point.

Customer service and support have been excellent. We typically raise a call via email or using a portal, and the support we receive is very seamless and timely within the SLA. They have been very supportive and provided the necessary solutions and clarifications.

Before Zscaler, we evaluated other solutions such as Netskope. We chose Zscaler due to its stability and the product roadmap, which were far better.

The initial setup was somewhat complex due to the need to review and tweak the network configuration, particularly for legacy networks. However, these challenges were resolved through collaboration with multiple vendors and internal teams.

For deployment, vendor support included two or three resources. Internally, we had one person handle the deployment via Microsoft Intune, and additional internal team members assisted with testing and rolling out to around 2,300 users. In total, there were three people from the vendor and three from our side, although the internal resources were not dedicated full-time.

The pricing of Zscaler SASE is quite high, rated at nine out of ten.

We considered Netskope before deciding on Zscaler.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

In Qatar industries, the legacy systems like the Bluecoat Proxy is still being used, these solutions work at a limited capacity. For instance, one of our organization's customers is in the Oil & Gas transportation business with tankers, if a company like them wants to deploy a proxy solution, physical proxy deploy is very complicated for such companies, therefore our organization proposes a cloud proxy solution to them like Zscaler DLP.

There are several cloud proxy solutions in the market, but Zscaler DLP provides the lowest latency rates due to the presence of global enforcement nodes in the solution. Whenever a potential customer approaches our company, which has a large workforce, has offices distributed across a wide geography and is in need of a cloud-based solution, we suggest Zscaler DLP for comprehensive global control.

The in-line DLP feature is one of the most vital features of the solution. Data security is a global concern, like in Europe there is the EDPR, while Qatar has its own data protection laws, so at our organization while data gets classified using different tools like Boldon James, security control in transit remains a concern so the in-line DLP policy is a valuable feature in Zscaler DLP that remains absent in most other products. Zscaler DLP takes care of the security when data is in motion.

The technical team in our company suggests there are some performance issues with the solution once the module addition begins. For instance, suppose I am using Zscaler Internet Access, and the connectivity speed is excellent, but the moment I start integrating some add-ons like DLP, then the solution considerably slows down in functionality.

But I believe the aforementioned instance or scenario is acceptable because an initial data check gets performed upon integration and it probably can be solved by the vendor through some alterations in the architecture. The set of features provided by Zscaler DLP is enough for the market in which our company operates.

I have been using Zscaler DLP for two and a half years.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. It's a highly stable solution. The product consistently functions all the time, but it slows down a couple of times when a large-scale data transfer is being processed that involves multiple policy checks.

Zscaler DLP almost never crashes, and when it does rarely, it's very specific to the customer environment. When some changes are made to the deployed product upon the customer's suggestion, initially, some instability arrives, which is then fixed through fine-tuning.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. The Zscaler DLP is extremely scalable and we have experienced it hands-on in our organization. One of the customers of our company was beginning operations in the Philippines, and they were already using Zscaler DLP in other locations like Kuwait and Jordan; they asked us to increase the license numbers and deploy the same Zscaler DLP solution for their Philippines location as well, the entire process was smoothly completed by our team.

I believe the downscaling of the solution is as easy as upscaling. Around 80 to 90 customers of our organization are using Zscaler DLP. The customer portfolio of our company for Zscaler DLP comprises 20% government enterprises, 60% are medium-scale businesses, and the rest are small-scale businesses.

The customer support team has been responsive enough to our organization's queries in Qatar. In our company, we had to reach out for customer support on very few occasions. I would rate the tech support an eight out of ten.

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. Our organization implements the setup operations and transitions of Zscaler DLP for each customer. Rarely the deployment team of our company has faced some challenges, but it has been due to the unique customer environments, server placements and connection requirements.

About 95% of the deployments have been carried out in our organization without any obstacles. Our organization always deploys Zscaler DLP on the cloud.

It's an affordable solution. I would rate the pricing a six out of ten. Once after deployment, you start bundling up additional components, the cost significantly increases. When compared to the cost of a competitor solution and the quality of Zscaler DLP, the price of the solution is justified.

Some customers who are familiar with other product environments of Palo Alto or Cisco might find Zscaler DLP a bit expensive when looking at it from an environment compatibility or opportunity perspective.

For companies that have operations across the globe, it's crucial for them to have the same set of data security controls and measures across all locations; Zscaler DLP helps in such implementations. For instance, if there are certain enforcement policies or data security norms implemented for the headquarters of an organization, Zscaler DLP allows a professional to just copy the implemented policies of one location to another, irrespective of the site members or users.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I would advise others to perform due diligence before directly adopting the product, but just because the product is the market leader doesn't mean it will fit perfectly into every environment.

I always analyze the customer's requirements and existing environment before proposing the best solution. If integrating Zscaler DLP into a Palo Alto environment will create difficulties, then it's better to choose a solution from Palo Alto.

We are using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange for its Zscaler Internet Access service. It provides web security, DLP, data protection, prevention, and lots more features.

It has improved our organization’s working process and efficiency.

It has some good data security and WIP features, providing secure Internet access. We get seamless access with our agents and users. It has some fantastic hardware. They have AI-powered integration with in-built features for the scheduler. It provides security and is connected to manage the security level, which is good.

The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.

I have been using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange for more than one year.

I don’t contact the support, but my team usually does.

Previously, I used Citrix.

The initial setup was straightforward. It took almost three months to deploy, but it was smooth.

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

It ensures a secure online environment for our users, irrespective of their location. By routing all internet traffic through the Zscaler Cloud, users can browse safely, shielded from malicious content. Whether connected from the office or home network, Zscaler enforces our defined policies consistently.

Using ZPA VPN users can connect to internal Network in secured way.

Our users experience a safe and secure internet connection, whether they are in the office or connecting via their home Wi-Fi network or a public network. The Zscaler policy governs their internet access consistently, eliminating the reliance on individual IPs.

We utilize a shared security VPN for users to establish a connection between their devices and the Zscaler Cloud, enabling them to access the office network. This secure connection allows users to connect to the Zscaler VPN and access the resources on the office network, making it a highly valuable component of our system.

Occasionally, issues arise particularly for government websites accessed by numerous users from all over country using Zscaler IP Range. This can trigger false positives, causing certain IP ranges to be perceived as a security threat or associated with malicious activities, resulting in blocks. In such instances, we often find ourselves waiting for the block to be lifted or having to engage with the concerned website administrators. This is where Zscaler's expertise becomes crucial in addressing false positive blocks, as these incidents might not necessarily indicate malicious intent but could be errors affecting access to the platform. Zscaler need to look into the solution, how Traffic getting generated towards such websites should not cross the threshold level of traffic getting generated from certain Zscaler IPs and getting resulted in block mode situation.

We are using it for more than four years.

It demonstrates overall stability and effectively upholds the smooth functioning of the entire infrastructure. We haven't encountered any issues with it. I would rate it nine out of ten.

In terms of scalability, our current setup is sufficient for our needs. We have a user base exceeding ten thousand. It's a ubiquitous tool for everyone in the business. Nearly all users utilize it for internet browsing every single day. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The technical support team effectively manages and provides robust support for the solution. I would rate it eight out of ten.

I used Websense before, but Zscaler maintains consistent policies whether users are in the office, at home, or in public places, offering a more convenient experience.

The initial setup process was time-consuming and encountered issues, particularly with logs. Although I wasn't present during the setup, it has been reported that significant time and numerous challenges were involved. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it five.

The deployment itself didn't take much time, but the challenge arose in identifying and resolving issues faced by numerous users. It took considerable time to pinpoint these issues. Maintenance is handled with support directly from Zscaler, and our existing security admin team oversees the management of both Zscaler Cloud and their skills.

We have observed a return on investment in a stable setup, ensuring secure internet access for users and instilling trust in the solution.

I would recommend anyone contemplating this product to carefully consider it. They can evaluate and explore the solution by taking a demo to better understand the technology. Once satisfied with the demo, they can proceed with rolling out the solution. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We use the solution to build zero-trust networks. We use it to block everything except the trusted URLs. We get a bunch of URLs from the customers, whitelist them in the solution, and everything else is blocked automatically.

An URL must be whitelisted for users to access it. When a customer tells us they need a particular URL, we analyze it and send it for approval. Once it is approved, we whitelist the URL for the user. The solution is useful for zero-trust and DLP.

The UI is easy to use. All the options are accessible.

The product has limited features. We only have the option to monitor URLs and HTTPS logs. The tool must provide IP-blocking features.

I have been using the solution for more than three years.

The tool is stable. For the past three years, I haven't seen it break down. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. When we search for logs, it doesn’t take much time. It’s quite fast, even if we have a lot of logs. We use more than 1000 URLs in a day. Getting the logs in real-time is quite important. Four of our customers are using the solution. We have 30,000 to 40,000 users.

I have used Symantec DLP.

The engineering team sets up the tool. We use the tool to analyze user behavior during incidents. We can see whether URLs accessed by the users were approved by the organization.

The product is a bit expensive.

We take support from Zscaler and provide the service to our clients. We are partners. People who want to use the product must explore the options. We can do multiple things for a single URL. We can restrict URLs to only access the GET request or POST request. We can do HTTP control and SSL inspection. We can also access the threat intel. We can look up a URL and get the details in real-time. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.