McAfee Web Gateway Cloud Service vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Lookout
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
24th
Average Rating
7.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Mobile Data Protection (7th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (12th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (18th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (43rd), Mobile Threat Defense (2nd), ZTNA as a Service (13th), ZTNA (10th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (18th)
McAfee Web Gateway Cloud Se...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
23rd
Average Rating
10.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (10th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (17th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of Lookout is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of McAfee Web Gateway Cloud Service is 0.4%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 2.5%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
Unique Categories:
Mobile Data Protection
7.1%
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
0.8%
No other categories found
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
2.8%
 

Featured Reviews

ML
Dec 22, 2022
Allows users to self-remediate security issues, maintaining their privacy and providing excellent vulnerability detection
We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide APIs to customers so we can query our data and use it in the cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now. Another improvement could be a more streamlined activation process for Android and iOS; there are several prompts when activating the application on a new device, and if that could be adapted to one click, that would be beneficial.
MF
Sep 11, 2023
A scalable and user-friendly tool that provides an easy-to-configure user interface
The solution is used for granular filtering. For example, an organization can use the solution to allow users to access Facebook but stop them from playing games The user interface is easy to configure. We don't have to configure a database manually. It’s already present in the product. We just…
VP
Oct 12, 2022
Has a wide range of product support and integration, and a better filtering feature versus other solutions
An area for improvement in Skyhigh Security is its UI. It needs to be enhanced and made more user-friendly. Right now, the UI of Skyhigh Security is sometimes confusing. For example, my company is deploying Skyhigh Security for a client and integrating it on the cloud, from an on-premises deployment to a hybrid deployment. Though the experience isn't bad, there needs to be more enhancements. Another room for improvement in Skyhigh Security is the limited training resources, especially when you compare it with Cisco, which has many study materials in the market, even free training resources. You'll get limited resources if you search for Skyhigh Security tutorials on Google and YouTube. Because of high-security requirements and the training material for Skyhigh Security not being available, most engineers and architects avoid the product because there'd be a lack of knowledge in configuring and achieving the goals you'd want to reach via the use of Skyhigh Security. The NOC team deploying the product is having difficulty getting training resources for Skyhigh Security. You'll be charged an enormous amount if you search the market for training because of the limited resources available. Skyhigh Security needs to work on marketing and awareness as an improvement to the product. I'd like to see proper branding in the next release of Skyhigh Security. for example, if I know the product and I have training materials, that would give me the confidence to recommend it to customers. Skyhigh Security should send marketing emails to people, especially architects, explaining what the product is about, its features, and where to get training materials on Skyhigh Security. A free lab available with the basic features of Skyhigh Security would also be great, so anyone can log in and check the product within the vendor site. It's just making one small lab that anyone could click on to access the product and see how basic features work. Currently, when you download Skyhigh Security, there are minimal resources for testing it, and if I don't know the product, why would I purchase it for testing? Through a small lab or trial, you can go and log in and say, "This is an excellent product, so I'm going to purchase it, then install it in my production environment." The on-premise version of Skyhigh Security can be integrated with cloud solutions. Still, it would be great if Skyhigh Security could be deployed on the cloud and proactively monitor on-premises integration, so customers who don't have on-premises infrastructure could also deploy Skyhigh Security on the cloud to integrate with both on-premises and cloud solutions. If Skyhigh Security can work in both environments, that would be nice because you can manage everything from a single product. Another feature I'd like to see in Skyhigh Security is the auto repair feature, which enables the product to repair itself whenever there's an issue. For example, suppose Skyhigh Security is used on a three-node cluster, and most of the cluster is down. In that case, the product should be able to re-trigger another node and create that node automatically. If one instance is down, Skyhigh Security should automatically create another instance. No product in the market currently supports auto repair, so if that feature is available in Skyhigh Security, many customer issues, such as breakdowns or downtimes, would be solved. The auto repair feature would also make Skyhigh Security good for DR (Disaster Recovery), and that would lessen customers' worry about production. Customers will confidently say, "Okay, the product is down, but Skyhigh Security will automatically repair it, so I won't need to worry about it."

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The user interface is easy to configure."
"We have gained a deep insight into our Shadow IT usage as well as the different activities involved in Office 365."
"It's an easy-to-use product."
"Box API features with DLP capabilities."
"The most valuable features of MVISION Cloud are the automatic reports and modification incidents."
"It help us monitor high risk services, blocking them, and also feeding them to our egress points."
"A stable solution with good support."
"It also prevents you from writing data to your Gmail and does not allow you to move your data outside of the corporate system. That is the most important feature for me."
"The most valuable features of McAfee Web Gateway are anti-malware, reports, and powerful categorization of web pages."
 

Cons

"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"The product should provide more integrations."
"The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP."
"Support for securing more cloud apps."
"I think that the User Interface could be improved."
"There isn't really any aspect that is lacking."
"Iron out the few bugs that I've seen."
"One thing that can be improved is their ability to integrate with other web proxies to discover unsanctioned IP apps."
"Skyhigh Security, as a product, is excellent, but in terms of the right services and support, those are lagging very much, for example, in Trellix. From one hundred, its score has gone down to ten, so ten out of one hundred, otherwise, it's the number one product."
"Needs integration with other technology ecosystems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of feature performance versus cost, they're a good value."
"The pricing is fair; it's comparable to our previous solution, and we carried out multiple POCs and POVs (proof of value). The product is worth the money we pay for it."
"Lookout is definitely on the lower end when it comes to price point and that seems to be the only differentiator. The technology is in place in this space and it's really about who is coming in at the better price point now."
"The licensing costs are good. Prisma has much more options and support for security, but it has a higher cost. For example, Lookout costs 2/3rd of Prisma's licensing price."
Information not available
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable."
"Some of our clients have a perpetual license and pay additional support yearly."
"The licensing fees are based on what environments you are monitoring."
"Pricing for Skyhigh Security is okay, though there's always a scope for price improvements. Its pricing is okay compared to other products because other products have very expensive licensing costs. Along with the licensing, support is also provided for Skyhigh Security, so pricing is reasonable, but if there's proactive or better support, that will justify the pricing. I haven't interacted with the Skyhigh Security technical support team yet, so I'd give pricing a four out of five rating for now."
"The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations."
"Have a risk-based approach towards pricing."
"It's an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Educational Organization
44%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lookout?
The licensing costs are good. Prisma has much more options and support for security, but it has a higher cost. For ex...
What needs improvement with Lookout?
The solution could improve identity integration as well. Zero trust, it's a good start as a zero-trust solution. More...
What needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway Cloud Service?
The product should provide more integrations. It will benefit the customers as they can use more solutions.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION Cloud?
The pricing is good and the licensing is straightforward. I'd rate the affordability nine out of ten.
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION Cloud?
The secure gateway could be improved. If they worked on that they would be more competitive. They should offer more l...
 

Also Known As

CipherCloud
No data available
McAfee MVISION Cloud, McAfee MVISION Unified Cloud Edge, McAfee Web Gateway, McAfee MVISION CNAPP, and Skyhigh Networks, McAfee Web Gateway
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Western Union.Aetna.DirecTV.Adventist.Equinix.Perrigo.Goodyear.HP.Cargill.Sony.Bank of the West.Prudential.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, Palo Alto Networks and others in Secure Web Gateways (SWG). Updated: May 2024.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.