We performed a comparison between Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection and Zscaler Internet Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Domain Name System (DNS) Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's user interface is very smooth compared to other products."
"The most valuable features of Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection are the services, DHCP, and debugging. Additionally, we can use APIs and ansible scripts."
"Infoblox Secure DNS helped us protect our internal environment by mitigating and stopping attacks through the Internet using DNS protocols and queries."
"DHCP is a basic service, and they've been doing it for years, so it's mature and stable."
"The most valuable feature of Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is its performance and visibility."
"I like that Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is one hundred percent good, performance-wise."
"The main advantages with Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection are the dashboards, the reporting system, and they have the GUI interface."
"It is a stable solution."
"In terms of management and visibility, there is a single panel where you can configure the policies for your entire organisation worldwide."
"The solution is scalable and stable."
"One feature that is valuable to me from an implementation point of view is that it's very easy to implement."
"The solution’s customer service is good."
"The most valuable feature of Zscaler Internet Access is that it is a consolidated solution, it comes with many features, such as DLP."
"Tech support is good."
"Whether you are in a hotel somewhere, or in Africa, it does not matter. You will get the Zscaler protection presence anywhere."
"Zscaler Web Security protects our users in remote locations from internet threats - even if they are not connected to our network."
"They should release frequent updates for its on-premises version."
"The solution's logging could be improved."
"The service monitoring information could be simplified of this appliance and the information displayed on the dashboards could be improved. I have not found one dashboard to be perfect. For example, in Splunk, I can create a dashboard in Grafana. However, in Grafana, it takes a very long time to create them. There should be another API to do it better."
"The solution is expensive."
"There is a steep learning curve to be able to use Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection well."
"They are not supporting high query logging. They have a very limited size for the syslog, so they are usually asking for external storage, external network, and integration in order to keep the syslog. If you are considering the high volume traffic of the carrier-grade, then the syslog will hold for around five to 10 minutes. This is not enough time and it is being rotated. This is the main issue and the main limitation that we face with them that they need to work on."
"There needs to be more capabilities in order to configure the console itself instead of the user interface dashboard. Configuring the DNS or DHCP through the console instead of the GUI dashboard would be better."
"Infoblox lacks an extensive product portfolio."
"They block Zscaler IPs when the traffic origin is from Zscaler IPs. They've been blocked by certain government organizations so the end users are not able to visit those websites unless we ask them to unblock those IP. This is a bit problematic."
"Another thing that I would like to see is if Zscaler could have a separate product for direct access. I looked at a private access solution, but I understand there's a separate product that isn't integrated with this."
"Zscaler should continue to make the user interface better. They should also improve the backup network and continue to expand it so that it can handle larger numbers of customers."
"Zscaler does not provide dedicated IPs to each customer. Hence, they share a pool of IPs provided by Zscaler. There is a chance of blacklisting these IPs. I also do not like the multi-management portal."
"Sometimes, support isn't available."
"Do not expect to pay for the service and start using it, like Gmail. Zscaler requires a proper implementation to be done to make it successful."
"The reporting functionality could be a bit easier to use. There is a reporting function, but it's quite hard to do any good reporting, from a user-management perspective. For example, if a department manager wants to know how his department is using the web, there is a way to get the data, but it's quite cumbersome to get it and show it well. And that's true for comparing between departments."
"If they can also integrate with the multi-factor authentication to prompt users to do another, second-factor authentication, that would be ideal."
More Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is ranked 2nd in Domain Name System (DNS) Security with 12 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 46 reviews. Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is rated 8.2, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection writes "Stable, with good performance, and has no issues, support-wise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, F5 BIG-IP DNS, Palo Alto Networks DNS Security, EfficientIP DNS Guardian and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Menlo Security Remote Browser Isolation. See our Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection vs. Zscaler Internet Access report.
We monitor all Domain Name System (DNS) Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.