macmon vs. SecureLink Enterprise Access vs. Zscaler Private Access

It does exactly what it needs to. The only times I've had serious issues with rolling out to a vendor is when they have a "contractual agreement" to only use their solution. Almost every vendor that I've worked with and shown this product to has been skeptical for the first 5 minutes and fully converted to liking the ease of use of the product by 10 minutes

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

• Easy to setup on a client PC or server for access
• Organizes client connections by gatekeeper so it is easy to find what you need
• File transfer option is great for uploading files to client servers

• 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

• Java based. Always an issue. I know they are working on this and it will be Javaless if we need it. I know that Java can cause issues across the board and I understand the need of it, but it does not make it any better when there are Java issues.
• Stronger integration with the Active Directory. Currently its only read-only, which is good and bad.
• I would love to see an App. I know they are working on this as well.

• 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

We are happy using securelink to access our client environments

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

The employees at Securelink have always been responsive and seem to be invested in the success of my company. They truly understand what their product means to us so if there is a problem, they are always willing to help. In the rare event that something is found on their end, they will be proactive and reach out to someone to help and get something on calendar for a fix

Securelink seems to work better than LogMein for a large enterprise group. Our company has over 10,000 different connections and securelink manages them well.

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've found that Securelink allows me to get a vendor access to an application for support purposes much faster than a provisioned VPN account and the red tape around this. I can set up a vendor to access an application suite in a half hour and it will be more secure than regular provisioning.
• The ROI is yet to be seen on this, but it certainly makes Compliance, Internal Audit, and Legal very happy, which helps everybody.
• Internally, there is much more push back and it has been problematic. For a tech, to have to log in to a server and navigate to a system is considered cumbersome, when before all they had to do was open up Putty or RDP to a server to get in. The only way to combat this is to force them to use Securelink by removing rights. Near impossible for the domain admins.

• 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