We use Zscaler CASB for DLP and shadow IT.

The most valuable features of Zscaler CASB are API integration and DLP.

Zscaler CASB should include integrations with other SaaS applications.

We just bought Zscaler CASB a week ago.

I rate Zscaler CASB a nine out of ten for stability.

Zscaler CASB has good scalability. I rate Zscaler CASB a seven out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support provides a late response; otherwise, it's fine.

I have previously worked with McAfee. Compared to Zscaler CASB, McAfee needs to upgrade a lot of things. We chose Zscaler CASB because of more applications and information that we could get to do some fine-tuning on the policies.

The solution's initial setup is supposed to be fairly easy since it's an API.

We haven't yet started to deploy the solution. We will seek the help of professional services to deploy Zscaler CASB.

Zscaler CASB is an expensive solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is less expensive and ten is more expensive, I rate Zscaler CASB's pricing a seven out of ten.

I recommend users consider the cost and benefit, integration, and supported applications before choosing Zscaler CASB.

Overall, I rate Zscaler CASB a seven out of ten.

It pretty much covers, like, if you implement it, it's going to cover, like, 80 to 90% of real estate for the organization.

On DLP terms, Zscaler Cloud DLP ensures that data doesn't go outside of the organization. So on the network level, Zscaler does a pretty good job.

The solution doesn't do a very good job of detection, but they definitely do a very good job of implementing the policies.

There is room for improvement in detection. From the detection perspective, like, how it detects the violations.

Another area of improvement is implementation through non-client connectors. The solution can be implemented in two ways. One uses the back file; the other one uses client connectors. So the client connector is pretty fast, but when it comes to non-client connectors and procedures, it's kind of delayed and slow. The policies don't reflect very soon. It takes, like, a day and, like, hours to get implemented. But if it's a client connector, it takes, like, two minutes. It's just so good.

In future releases, I would like to see two things. It's not more of a feature but more like an enhancement. So I would like to see an enhancement in their proximity when detecting credit card details and past support details, and PII data.

Another area of improvement is support.

I have been using this solution for around nine months. I use the latest version 6.2.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

Scalability is pretty good. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

There is room for improvement in support.

The initial deployment is pretty easy. That's pretty straightforward.

We have definitely seen an ROI.

The price is a little bit on the higher side, especially if you are going to add, like, packs or bundles to your subscription. But otherwise, it's pretty decent.

I would suggest to keep your policies simple. Don't complicate them because it depends on your organization and how you set it up. So once you are doing it, just keep it clean and simple.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We are using it for monitoring the global areas, which Zscaler considers for people who are roaming around the system to have a secure connection to internal applications.

It has made things easier and more secure while connecting to the client's private applications.

The most valuable feature is the manageability of the micro tunnels.

There is improvement in enhancing proper manageability, policies, and logs. So, log management could be improved.

Moreover, I'd just like to see an improvement in stability.

I have been using this solution for six months. We use the latest version 6.1.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.

Scalability is good.

The setup is straightforward, but it's a little more technical. Nevertheless, it's pretty straightforward.

We have it deployed on both cloud and on-premises.

We have definitely seen an ROI.

Overall, I'll rate it at nine out of ten.

It serves various purposes. Overall, it's pretty good. Not bad at all.

It has been helpful in maintaining our infrastructure. The granular level control it offers allows us to set application policies per application for each user.

The most valuable feature is policy creation and creating cloud instances.

Zscaler CASB need to improve the functioning of the application, especially the sanctioning of the application.

Another area of improvement is the granular level control of how you can assign policies based on user access. Currently, their granularity is not that good. They either give you access to CloudApp or not. User management can be improved.

I have been using this solution for a year. I use the latest version.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We have seen an ROI.

I would advise other users to focus on properly managing the cloud instances and avoid overcomplicating cloud application policies unless it's absolutely necessary.

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

Zscaler functions as a kind of proxy, but they lack responsiveness when it comes to customer requests. The granularity in blocking is not sufficient. For example, when a new domain is detected, it is automatically blocked for 30 days. If there is no further information, it is added to the trusted list. Attackers are aware of this and take advantage of it. They set up a benign site, get it categorized as safe, and then introduce malicious content afterward. Trying to get the categories reassigned or realigned is a challenge, as Zscaler is not very responsive in addressing such issues. In my experience, compared to BlueCoat, Zscaler falls short in terms of responsiveness.

I'm currently reviewing Zscaler for our organization. We implemented it about two years ago. It's part of our zero-trust architecture initiative.

However, we need to compare it with NetScout. Zscaler has certain capabilities like SD-WAN, and the proxy is quite good. Although, I had to stop using SD-WAN because it wasn't integrating well with Microsoft or Kaspersky.

It is stable. In my experience of about five years, I have only encountered two problems caused by it. So, I wouldn't rate it a nine out of ten. It's generally stable, with occasional issues.

The scalability is pretty good. I would give it an eight out of ten. However, their responsiveness to customer concerns is not as strong as other vendors I have worked with.

There is definitely an ROI. Before I joined my current company, it was implemented about a year and a half ago, and it significantly reduced noise and improved team visibility. The SOC has always been satisfied with its performance.

So, I believe there has been a good return on investment compared to my company's previous solution, Fortinet, which wasn't very effective. We are very happy with Zscaler.

When it was implemented, it beat the competition on price according to the two companies I know that have it.

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

We manage multiple customers using ZIA and ZPA to access internal resources and secure their own web applications. It acts like a VPN access connectivity, and ZIA is used as an internet gateway for users.

Sandboxing, DLP, and SSL inspection engine are the most valuable features of Zscaler SASE. Zscaler SASE is an easy-to-use tool that manages the cloud security architecture.

Currently, we are using APIs, and we need some enhancement on the script running with the Zscaler SASE cloud API. Also, it would be better if we could integrate with other vendors. We often face performance and latency issues with Zscaler SASE.

I have been using Zscaler SASE for the last four years.

I rate Zscaler SASE a seven and a half out of ten for stability. We face performance issues if there is any anomaly on the nodes bonded with our architecture from some location. We also face some routing and latency issues on Zscaler SASE that need to be rectified. In addition, there are no dedicated Zscaler nodes in countries like China and Dubai.

I rate Zscaler SASE a six out of ten for scalability.

Zscaler SASE's deployment time depends upon your design, architecture, and infrastructure size. If you have a small network of offices, the deployment will take at least three to four days. But if you have a larger architecture, deployment time will depend upon your planning, staging, and implementation.

With Zscaler SASE, we can manage multiple features in a single platform. We can manage all allocations that we have in our architecture on a single platform. This reduces the operation cost and takes fewer resources to deploy because we have APIs in Zscaler SASE. API would be the simplest way to configure anything across our sites if we have a larger retail architecture.

ZPA is configured on our architecture, but ZIA's traffic goes to the Zscaler-hosted cloud.

Overall, I rate Zscaler SASE an eight out of ten.

We can use Zscaler Private Access as a recipient for external communication. Zscaler Private Access can help users sitting in our organization domain and trying to access their own internal company sources. The traffic is forwarded to us through the Zscaler Private Access node, which we can have in our own infrastructure, or it can be hosted on the Zscaler private cloud.

We are using Zscaler Private Access to build our own Zscaler private node. Although this node is maintained and managed by Zscaler, it resides in our own data center or domain. So the traffic forwarded from the user system towards any internal resource will go through this private node.

Zscaler Private Access is a platform that eliminates the complexity of VPN configuration. Zscaler Private Access is easy to configure and manage and takes less time to configure. We can manage our own application or secure our application and our own internal traffic. We can create a security node in our own infrastructure.

We are getting some issues with internet access. Authenticating or onboarding something on Zscaler Private Access manually is a troublesome task. Users report application access or latency issues with Zscaler Private Access.

I have been using Zscaler Private Access for the last two and a half years.

I rate Zscaler Private Access eight and a half out of ten for stability.

I rate Zscaler Private Access an eight out of ten for scalability.

Zscaler Private Access' initial setup is not as easy as ZIA, but it's okay compared to other platforms.

Zscaler Private Access will ease your task, equal to a VPN. Lots of companies are using their own VPN access.

Overall, I rate Zscaler Private Access an eight out of ten.

As IT integrators, we are using the solution for application control, URL filtering, sandboxing, and antivirus. We have modules with data leak prevention and cloud browser isolation, device posture checking, related to the access because we are also using it for the ZTNA services, but it's not related to the Secure Web Gateway. We are also using it in ZIA with a firewall as a service.

I believe Zscaler SASE has given us increased security with endpoint protection. We may not have eliminated 100% of the threats, but we are resistant to threats on the Internet. The solution blocks almost all known vulnerabilities or problems related to phishing actions, so I would say that is the biggest benefit.

With SASE, we have a single platform that covers multiple task services with which we need to control access. All the features are equally valuable.

The menu for the ZIA portal could be organized a little bit differently. The most-used modules should be at the top of the menus, not somewhere near the bottom, some of them are not organized well in my opinion.

I have been working with Zscaler SASE for almost one year.

There were a few global issues this year that something was not working correctly, or that sometimes we experienced different behavior with the filtering policies between the points of presence. For example, if there is a user located in Amsterdam, then it was filtering traffic differently than in Frankfurt because they were connected to two different points of presence. The issue was later resolved by technical support.

The solution is scalable.

The quality of customer support depends on the situation, where sometimes the correct actions are taken immediately. So sometimes, I would rate it a ten out of ten.

But sometimes we have to explain the same situation, even referencing old tickets, while the support agent would not even check what was done in the previous tickets, and it takes much longer to solve the case. In such situations, I would rate customer support a four out of ten.

The setup is quite easy. The primary configuration requires some adjustments to the client's needs, but it's quite easy.

The deployment depends on a questionnaire to determine expectations, what should be checked, verified, and what works with the highest SLA. The actual deployment does not require a lot of staff members.

Maintenance for the solution includes keeping the client's connector updated and checking the device posture.

I have downloaded reports of Cisco Umbrella, Fortinet FortiGate, FortiProxy, and Zscaler.

I would recommend Zscaler SASE, for sure, and would rate it a nine out of ten.

The security issues one faces with legacy VPN solutions are addressed using a SaaS VPN platform. If an organization wants to implement a zero-trust network architecture, then a SaaS VPN platform is the way to go about it.

The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are its ability to integrate with multiple IDPs and application segmentation.

More on-prem infrastructure is required when Zscaler Private Access is to be implemented as a single point of entry.

Since the whole concept of app segmentation is license based, making the app segmentation extremely granular becomes very expensive for an organization. As a result, not all organizations would adopt a granular approach for rolling out their Zscaler Private Access solution. So the entire approach must be seen differently, not the standard license-based approach. As an organization, if I want to make the access for my employees more granular, then it means that I will have to buy more licenses. Organizations with 10,000 to 20,000 applications, including their business partners also connecting to their applications, would need to invest a lot of money into making it granular. Okay. That kind of investment may not be viable for every organization to make, which could limit the use of Zscaler Private Access.

I have been using Zscaler Private Access for about two and a half years.

I rate Zscaler Private Access a nine out of ten for stability.

I rate Zscaler Private Access a ten out of ten for scalability. Zscaler Private Access can be used for more than 2,00,000 users.

Zscaler tells you right at the front that the implementation needs to be taken up by Zscaler-certified people. It does require a good amount of knowledge of the platform. Other options are available where Zscaler makes professional services and resident engineers available. So Zscaler Private Access is a complicated solution, but they facilitate much of that implementation. I rate Zscaler Private Access a seven out of ten for ease of initial setup.

Zscaler Private Access's deployment depends on how much time an organization spends preparing for the solution's implementation. If you have a checklist prepared beforehand, you can deploy the solution in probably one and a half or two months. But if you start deploying it and then start making the necessary preparations for the change, it could easily take more than a year for a large organization.

To deploy Zscaler Private Access, you need to follow a full-fledged project management process. This process includes requirement definitions, coming up with a high-level design document, preparing your project plan, coming up with a low-level design document, going into a pilot phase, and then the production rollout.

Zscaler Private Access is extremely expensive. I rate Zscaler Private Access an eight out of ten for pricing.

Zscaler Private Access has its own data centers and its own private cloud.

Overall, I rate Zscaler Private Access a seven out of ten.