Zscaler vs. VPN and Zscaler’s VPN Alternative (ZPA)

How Does Zscaler Compare to VPN? 

Zscaler isn’t a traditional VPN, it is a cloud-native platform that replaces VPNs with Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA). Zscaler Private Access (ZPA) for internal apps offers secure, app-specific access without network entry, while Zscaler Internet Access (ZIA) secures internet traffic, brokering direct user-to-app connections. Zscaler reduces the attack surface compared to traditional VPNs, which grant broad network access. Zscaler can also integrate with existing VPNs for legacy apps.

Zscaler vs. VPN:

• Traditional VPNs: Create an encrypted tunnel, granting users broad access to the corporate network, making the entire network vulnerable if compromised.
• Zscaler: Acts as a secure broker, connecting authorized users directly to specific applications, never the entire network, reducing the attack surface. It uses a “never trust, always verify” zero-trust model.

Key differences:

• Reduced attack surface: Apps aren’t exposed to the internet.
• Better performance: Direct, fast connections via global points of presence.
• Simplified management: Unified policy and agent.
• Zero trust: Verifies every access request for better security.

Is Zscaler a VPN? 

No, Zscaler is not a traditional VPN. While both Zscaler and VPNs provide remote access to corporate resources, they work in different ways.

A VPN creates an encrypted tunnel between the user and the corporate network, granting full network access. This can introduce security risks, such as lateral movement by attackers once inside the network, and performance bottlenecks due to backhauling traffic.

Zscaler uses a zero trust approach. It does not connect users to the network but instead connects them directly to specific applications after verifying identity, context, and security posture. This limits the attack surface and enforces least-privilege access.

Zscaler replaces traditional VPNs in many organizations by offering faster, more secure, and more scalable access to cloud and internal resources.

Zscaler vs. VPN: Key Differences 

Zscaler Private Access (ZPA) and traditional VPNs both aim to provide remote access to enterprise applications, but they approach the problem from fundamentally different perspectives. VPNs extend the network perimeter to remote users, while ZPA follows a zero trust model that removes network exposure entirely.

The main issue with VPNs is that they implicitly trust users once they connect. After authentication, users typically gain broad access to the internal network, which increases the attack surface. If credentials are compromised, attackers can move laterally across systems. VPNs also rely on route-based connections, which can unintentionally expose infrastructure and applications to the internet.

ZPA flips this model. Instead of providing network-level access, it connects users directly to applications based on identity and policy. No network is exposed, and users can’t even discover applications they’re not explicitly allowed to access. This app-to-user model reduces risk and aligns with zero trust principles; no implicit trust, no broad access, and no need for network-layer visibility.

Deployment and scalability also differ. VPNs often require dedicated hardware and frequent maintenance, especially when scaling across geographies. ZPA is cloud native, with lightweight connectors that eliminate the need for appliances and simplify updates. This means faster deployments, reduced operational overhead, and better resilience.

Zscaler’s VPN Alternative: Zscaler Private Access (ZPA)

Zscaler Private Access (ZPA) is Zscaler’s zero trust network access (ZTNA) solution that replaces traditional VPNs by connecting users directly to applications, not the network. Unlike VPNs, which place users inside the network perimeter and allow broad access, ZPA uses identity- and context-based policies to create user-to-app segmentation. This eliminates lateral movement and significantly reduces the attack surface.

ZPA delivers secure access by brokering connections through the nearest Zscaler point of presence (PoP), avoiding the need to backhaul traffic to a centralized data center. It hides application IPs from the internet, making them invisible to attackers and reducing exposure to threats like ransomware and DDoS. Users connect through outbound-only connections, with no inbound connectivity required, aligning with a true zero trust architecture.

From a performance perspective, ZPA improves user experience by minimizing latency and eliminating the overhead of VPN clients and infrastructure. It supports a unified agent for endpoint access and also allows agentless access for browser-based applications, simplifying deployment across devices and user types.

Operationally, ZPA reduces the complexity of managing remote access. IT teams no longer need to deal with VPN hardware, routing rules, or patch management. Policy enforcement becomes consistent across users and locations, including headquarters, branch offices, and remote workers.

Related content: Read our guide to Zscaler alternatives (coming soon)

Key Zscaler Private Access Limitations 

While Zscaler Private Access (ZPA) offers a strong security model and operational benefits, there are several limitations reported by users on the G2 platform:

• Troubleshooting complexity: When access issues occur, it’s not always clear whether the problem lies with policies, connectivity, the client, or backend infrastructure. Logs and diagnostics often require deep technical knowledge, making root cause analysis difficult.
• User experience and performance issues: Users have reported inconsistent performance, including slow application load times, dropped connections, and degraded upload speeds, especially during network transitions or peak usage hours. Some mobile apps also fail to load properly under ZPA.
• No real-time error notifications: ZPA does not provide proactive alerts when connections fail or go offline. Users often discover issues only after manually opening the app, leading to frustration and delayed resolution.
• Aggressive site filtering: In some cases, legitimate websites are blocked unnecessarily. While intended to enhance security, this filtering can interrupt access to useful services and reduce user satisfaction.
• Complex initial setup: The configuration process can be difficult for new administrators. Setting up rules, connectors, and access policies takes time and often involves trial and error, especially when migrating from traditional VPNs.
• Password management friction: Resetting or changing passwords can be cumbersome. Some users report needing to contact support just to reset credentials, which adds friction and delays.
• High cost for smaller organizations: The overall cost of deploying and maintaining ZPA may be prohibitive for smaller teams, especially compared to traditional VPN solutions.
• UI and reporting limitations: The interface could be more intuitive, and the reporting dashboard lacks customization in some areas. Deeper visibility into performance and security metrics often requires manual workarounds.
• Authentication delays: When multiple integrations are active (e.g., identity providers or MFA), users may experience delays in authentication, adding latency to the login process.
• Challenging migration process: Shifting from network-based access to application-based access involves identifying all internal app dependencies and user patterns, which can be time-consuming and prone to misconfigurations.

Venn: Zscaler Alternative for BYOD Environments

Zscaler delivers strong network security, and many organizations use it alongside Venn. But Zscaler was never built to secure business activity on BYOD laptops. It can’t separate work from personal use on an unmanaged device, and its controls touch the entire machine, creating user friction, slowing adoption, and often leading to shelfware. And once data leaves the Zscaler cloud perimeter (for example, copied from a local app), it’s no longer protected.

Venn’s Blue Border™ fills that gap. Similar to an MDM solution but designed for laptops, Venn creates a company-controlled secure enclave where all work data lives encrypted, access is managed, and business apps run locally with no latency. Everything inside the Blue Border is governed and compliant. Everything outside remains fully personal and private.

Key features include:

• Secure Enclave technology: Encrypts and isolates work data on personal Mac or PC computers, both for browser-based and local applications.
• Zero trust architecture: Uses a zero trust approach to secure company data, limiting access based on validation of devices and users.
• Visual separation via Blue Border: Visual cue that distinguishes work vs. personal sessions for users.
• Supports turnkey compliance: Using Venn helps companies maintain compliance on unmanaged Macs with a range of regulatory mandates, including HIPAA, PCI, SOC, SEC, FINRA and more.
• Granular, customizable restrictions: IT teams can define restrictions for copy/paste, download, upload, screenshots, watermarks, and DLP per user.