Cloud security / zero-trust exchange (SSE). AI-generated from public sourcesThe starting point for every profile: auto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials, and not yet confirmed by the vendor or an independent analyst. Nothing here is hidden or overstated — it simply has not been reviewed yet.Where every profile starts, before the vendor or an analyst has reviewed it. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →
Tools & products
Read by an AI model from zscaler.com’s own pages. What the vendor says it does, not independently verified.
Integrates with: 1Password ↗, AlgoSec ↗, Anomali ↗, Apiiro ↗, Arctic Wolf ↗, Armis ↗, Arnica ↗, Aryaka ↗
3 of 5 independent trust signals established
Zscaler has 3 dimensions with established evidence. The rest have not been confirmed yet.
Not yet established: Independently verified · Disclosure posture
Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?
Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.
Is this a real, durable business?
How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.
Security headers (3/5) — checked 10/18/2026
Infrastructure & transparency signals
1 CVE has an estimated 10%-or-higher chance of having already been exploited despite not appearing on CISA's KEV catalog. KEV is a curated record of confirmed cases rather than a complete census, so this is where its coverage is likely thinnest — an estimate from EPSS history, not a finding. Based on a median of 2 EPSS observations per CVE.
Likely-exploited estimates here rest on a median of 2 EPSS observations per CVE — too little history to read as a trend yet. It deepens daily as scores are collected.
Zscaler MCP Server versions 0.7.0 and 0.7.1 has an issue where HMAC confirmation tokens were not bound to the target resource identifier, allowing an MCP client or agent to replay a token generated fo…
A file type attribution issue in Zscaler Internet Access File Type Control evaluation rules may allow improper evaluation of File Type Control policies in rare circumstances.
Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.
The platform admin controls the formula's weights.
Datasheets, whitepapers, and case studies found on zscaler.com by the enrichment loop. Links open the original documents on the vendor's own site.
Product information on this page is auto-generated by 0-Doubt from public sources and not yet confirmed by the vendor or an independent analyst, unless an item is individually labelled otherwise. How trust works →
Integrated by: 1Kosmos, Adaptive Security, Airgap Networks, Anomali, Axoflow, Beyond Identity, Blackpoint Cyber, Blink Ops, Complyan, Compyl, ConductorOne, Coralogix, Cotool, CrowdStrike, CyberOne, Cybervergent, D3 Security, Darktrace, Discern Security, Dropzone AI, Elastic, EmpowerID, Exaforce, Expel, ExtraHop, Fidelis Security, FireMon, General Dynamics, Gigamon, Gurucul, Imprivata, InstaSafe Technologies, Intezer, Itential, Loginsoft, Mitigata, Nagomi Security, Nile Secure, Obsidian Security, OctoXLabs, Oleria, Oomnitza, Open Systems, Orca Security, OutThink, P0 Security, Panther, PhishFirewall, Plixer, Portal26, Portkey, Proofpoint, Prophet Security, Push Security, Qevlar AI, Reach Security, Realm.Security, Red Canary, Saviynt, Seceon Inc, Secret Double Octopus, SecurelyShare, Seemplicity, SentinelOne, Seraphic, Simbian, Spirion, StrangeBee, Stream.Security, Tenable, Tenzir, ThreatDefence, Torq, UpGuard, Vectra AI, Veza, Votiro, Wiz, XM Cyber, mondoo, plainid
What do they do when something goes wrong?
What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.
Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?
How much this vendor volunteers before you have to ask.
Are they still shipping, or coasting?
Whether this vendor is visibly still building.
The Zscaler Client Connector for Windows prior to 2.1.2.74 had a stack based buffer overflow when connecting to misconfigured TLS servers. An adversary would po…
The Zscaler Client Connector for Windows prior to 2.1.2.105 had a DLL hijacking vulnerability caused due to the configuration of OpenSSL. A local adversary may …
The Zscaler Client Connector prior to 3.1.0 did not sufficiently validate RPC clients, which allows a local adversary to execute code with system privileges or …
The Zscaler Client Connector prior to 2.1.2.150 did not quote the search path for services, which allows a local adversary to execute code with system privilege…
An Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Zscaler Client Connector on MacOS allows OS Command Injection. This issue affects Zscaler Client Connector on MacO…
On affected versions of Zscaler client connector, a pre-installed peer app can tear down the Zscaler tunnel, force user logout, and toggle packet capture.
An improper input validation vulnerability in Zscaler Client Connector on Android and ChromeOS allows an attacker to potentially bypass Zscaler controls.
A race condition in the ZPA tunnel handler of affected versions of Zscaler Client Connector (ZCC) allows a heap corruption, resulting in a denial of service (client crash) and potentially arbitrary co…
Multiple vulnerabilities on affected versions of Zscaler Client Connector allow remote code execution, giving an unauthenticated, unprivileged user the ability to execute arbitrary code in the ZCC con…
Multiple vulnerabilities on affected versions of Zscaler Client Connector allow local privilege escalation, giving an unprivileged user the ability to execute arbitrary code in a privileged context.
A locally exploitable buffer overflow bug can cause a local denial-of-service attack on affected versions of Zscaler Client Connector on Android and ChromeOS.
A remotely exploitable buffer overflow bug can cause a local and kernel denial-of-service attack on affected versions of Zscaler Client Connector on Windows.
An authentication bypass issue exists in communications between affected versions of the Zscaler Client Connector and the Zscaler Client Connector Portal.
An incorrect startup configuration of affected versions of Zscaler Client Connector on Windows may cause a limited amount of traffic from being inspected under rare circumstances.
A health check port on Zscaler Client Connector on Windows, versions 4.6 < 4.6.0.216 and 4.7 < 4.7.0.47, which under specific circumstances was not released after use, allowed traffic to potentially …
An improper verification of cryptographic signature in Zscaler's SAML authentication mechanism on the server-side allowed an authentication abuse.
An improper verification of a loaded library in Zscaler Client Connector on Mac < 4.2.0.241 may allow a local attacker to elevate their privileges.
An Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Zscaler Client Connector on MacOS allows OS Command Injection. This issue affects Zscaler Client Connector on MacOS <4.2.
In certain cases, Zscaler Internet Access (ZIA) can be disabled by PowerShell commands with admin rights. This affects Zscaler Client Connector on Windows <4.2.1
The Zscaler Updater process does not validate the digital signature of the installer before execution, allowing arbitrary code to be locally executed. This affects Zscaler Client Connector on MacOS <4…
While copying individual autoupdater log files, reparse point check was missing which could result into crafted attacks, potentially leading to a local privilege escalation. This issue affects Zscaler…
Anti-tampering can be disabled under certain conditions without signature validation. This affects Zscaler Client Connector <4.2.0.190 with anti-tampering enabled.
An Improper Validation of signature in Zscaler Client Connector on Windows allows an authenticated user to disable anti-tampering. This issue affects Client Connector on Windows <4.2.0.190.
Showing 40 of 1247 discovered documents.