Check Point Harmony SASE vs. Zscaler Private Access

I'd suggest that Perimeter81 is recommended when you want something that is easy to administrate, with little maintenance, unlike a VPN/secure network that you host and manage internally. We've had incidents when there has been downtime at Perimeter81, which has effectively locked us out of some of our secure services (anything locked down via IP). They have made improvements to their infrastructure and it seems to have improved in recent months, but this is something to keep in mind for critical connections

Incentivized

Zscaler Private Access works really well in environments setup for FQDNs and where you know what users should/shouldn't be accessing on what ports. You can use Zscaler Private Access to figure out these kinds of features but that doesn't always mean you'll be correct. It also provides a consistent experience for users as they can access their materials anywhere. It also makes the user the last line of defense. If a user's account is compromised then the attacker has access to everything they already did. It doesn't work great in OT environments or Server based environments. Flows have to be initiated from the client and not the server for stuff to behave properly.

Incentivized

• Simple easy to read icon.
• You can hover over and see if you are logged in via the systems tray on your computer.
• Easy to switch between regions around the world.

Incentivized

• Allows strong cyber security corporate policies
• Very reliable VPN application that operates at 100% efficiency
• Very easy to be configured with friendly user interface

Incentivized

• Customer support was lacking before, now seems better.
• Had much difficulty using Chrome as my browser to install the app.
• Increase the throughput speeds at time would be nicer.

Incentivized

• Granularity and Complexity of Policy Enforcement
• Application Segmentation and Listener Configuration - The way applications are defined and listened for is fundamental to ZPA, but can be a source of frustration, especially when dealing with legacy or non-HTTP protocols
• The ZCC is the user's primary gateway, but its control over local system network behavior can sometimes clash with enterprise requirements.

Incentivized

The environment feels more secure, and we are seeing that users are adapting to it fast. The fact that we have tools to assist the users with their day-to-day access helps, as we can hand it off to the helpdesk without any escalations to the Network team. It is a work in progress for our agency, but we are seeing the benefits from the solution.

Incentivized

In the beginning, it was a bit rough getting it to work and getting any kind of quality support from customer service. But recently they really improved their service and customer service. I believe they raise 100M in new funding which provides them the resources to make a better product with better tools and a better help desk.

Incentivized

Well ZPA is a good solution, however everyone has their own advantage and disadvantages, with ZPA you can deploy ZTNA model, which will help you better control on access, however Palo Alto, Fortinet they are also market leading firewall solution, and you can not deny if they are not providing the same features.

Incentivized

• I think it is just a cost of doing business.
• I don't think the cost is too prohibitive.
• We also use it as an example of what a small cost can provide big protection for your security.

Incentivized

• Positive: We have now charged users internally for the service
• Negative: Dealing with users who also have the Zscaler Client Connector for their company, can cause confusions
• Negative: Enabling the Zscaler Internet Access entitlement has been a major headache for us because Zscaler Private Access users can't autheniticate through ZIA on a non corporate device.

Incentivized