Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Netskope vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
8th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (7th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (3rd), ZTNA as a Service (11th)
Netskope
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
4th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
10th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (19th), ZTNA as a Service (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 1.7%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope is 10.9%, up from 9.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 1.9%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Q&A Highlights

TT
Nov 01, 2017
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Yusuf_Hashmi - PeerSpot reviewer
Centralized policy management and real-time protection provide consistent security across locations
The centralized policy management is essential for applying consistent controls across all locations. The cloud enablement feature helps eliminate on-premises infrastructure by adopting Netskope ( /products/netskope-reviews ). For threat detection and prevention, being able to lay down specific granular controls to block uploads to non-approved websites or web apps is very effective. Real-time protection enhances our security posture by providing continuous monitoring and prevention at the endpoints, which is spread across individuals working from various locations.
Santiago Gomez - PeerSpot reviewer
Has improved the organization's PCI compliance with data loss prevention
I use the solution on a Macintosh computer and it has issues and does not work when I try to log in from the Safari Browser, but it works fine when I log in from the Google Chrome browser. The console has issues when the login is done through a Safari Browser. The console has to be more competitive and the compatibility of the browser needs to be better. I want to know about Skyhigh's competitiveness with other brands and about the vulnerability assessment and micro segmentations. I know Skyhigh has other products, but right now, I am studying what this new product is about. They only have English support, so I would like for them to add some Spanish support.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"It's one of the top-ranking solutions in the market, and it's very responsive. We are using Netskope, and Netskope provides a load of features for SQL, STP, and traffic control."
"Amazing reporting and tracking mechanisms."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"The cloud enablement feature helps eliminate on-premises infrastructure by adopting Netskope."
"It is a very scalable tool."
"The initial setup of Netskope CASB is easy, it is not complex."
"Netskope started with a cloud-first approach, which makes it adaptable to the day-to-day changes that the cloud will generate."
"Netskope is a really good product. I cannot segregate which features are the most valuable. We find most of the features to be valuable. It gives us what we are looking for."
"Good anti-virus filtering, URL categorization, and reporting capabilities."
"Improves creation of security alerts on web proxy logs by having a separate system interpret said logs."
"It's an easy-to-use product."
"Skyhigh performs well, and we can choose from virtual and hardware plans. We can deploy the ISO on as many virtual machines as possible and easily set up high availability on the web proxy. The location doesn't matter. The user at a site will always access the web proxy for that location. It's suitable for an organization distributed across multiple regions."
"Overall, the performance is good."
"The other products that I have evaluated do not have the scalability options that McAfee has."
"The feature I like best about Skyhigh Security is its wide range of product support. For example, my company had NetApp storage running, and Skyhigh Security has on-premises NetApp storage support, which isn't available in other solutions. Skyhigh Security also has a better filtering feature versus the filtering feature in other solutions."
"The threat protection capabilities are very strong."
 

Cons

"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"I would like to have an identity theft protection function."
"A bit of latency is observed in some of the applications."
"Deployment and policy tweaking were two areas where improvement needs to be made."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"Compatibility with other proxy polars would be helpful."
"One area for improvement I've seen in Skyhigh Security is that it lacks support for unsanctioned applications, where customers have their applications. Those applications do not come from Microsoft or other popular vendors. For example, Microsoft has support for Teams and it has support for OneDrive, but it doesn't have support for custom applications built by customers. Customers have internal teams building and publishing applications to the external world, but Skyhigh Security doesn't have support for those applications, and this is the main problem I've seen. The solution only supports a pool of applications that are from Microsoft and other major SaaS vendors. McAfee doesn't provide support for custom applications, compared to other vendors who provide it. For example, Bitglass and Netskope both have support for custom applications. Another area for improvement in Skyhigh Security is that its API support is a little weak. I also have not seen a strong integration between the solution and other McAfee products."
"Skyhigh Security is complex to manage. While it should ideally be more user-friendly, customers often find themselves having to manage it post-deployment."
"There are no training videos available for the product."
"The biggest challenge we have with McAfee is their cross-cloud support."
"The secure gateway could be improved."
"McAfee needs to add more products that could be managed from the cloud."
"The Skyhigh for Google Drive interface and policy engine is a bit confusing and limited when compared against other Google Drive CASB capabilities."
"Its initial setup could be more straightforward."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Pricing is a little expensive but it is affordable."
"There is a license required for this solution and there are many licensing models available. For example, what applications are covered as part of the license."
"The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case."
"I would rate the pricing nine out of ten."
"The pricing is competitive."
"I wasn't involved in the initial discussions about its cost. However, within the next year, by around June, I'll need to review the vendors' quotes. Typically, our procurement team handles the process by issuing an RFP to vendors to get quotes. From there, we evaluate based on pricing and may conduct a proof of concept to assess value."
"Netskope's pricing is reasonable compared to Microsoft."
"The licensing fees are based on what environments you are monitoring."
"Some of our clients have a perpetual license and pay additional support yearly."
"This is an expensive product, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations."
"Pricing is not out of reach."
"There is an annual licensing cost to use McAfee Web Gateway. The purchasing of licensing can be difficult for the government sector."
"The tool is not expensive."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
850,900 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

TT
Nov 1, 2017
Nov 1, 2017
I have only done a peripheral review of CASB vendors in the past few months, but I do agree that the top ones to consider right now are Skyhigh Networks and Netskope. When looking at a CASB, be sure not only to consider if they offer all the right checkboxes, but take a look under the covers to see how they are handling those checkboxes. Sometimes, integration between the components is severe...
2 out of 10 answers
SB
Oct 3, 2017
We have used Skyhigh Networks for three years and very happy with it. Over the years they have added new capabilities. The original service provided an inventory of cloud applications that our internal people accessed as well as statistics and risk ratings and configuration guidance to block access. Over time they added more functions such as "protect" services for cloud applications like Microsoft O365 and Google Apps that provide protection for users regardless of whether they are on our network or anywhere on the Internet. We see the service as very effective and they have improved capabilities over the years such as improved reporting.
EC
Oct 3, 2017
No help on any of these, but thanks for the question. For a holistic approach (because anything less is insufficient), I've begun using Sophos appliances, services, and endpoint protection which all speak with each other and really fortify a network on all fronts. Services take up resources, so be sure to invest in an appliance powerful enough to serve all your endpoints effectively. Hope this helps.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
5%
Educational Organization
48%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about iboss?
Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss.
What needs improvement with iboss?
I have a couple of thoughts for improvement, but usually when I address them with my rep, they put it into the featur...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We use it primarily for simpler filtering because we're a K12 entity.
Which is better, Zscaler internet access or Netsckope CASB?
We researched Netskope but ultimately chose Zscaler. Netskope is a cloud access security broker that helps identify ...
What do you like most about Netskope CASB?
The product's analytics part is pretty fine.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netskope CASB?
Netskope is cost-effective compared to similar solutions like Zscaler.
What do you like most about McAfee Web Gateway?
Data loss prevention and user behavior analysis are two valuable features.
What needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway?
The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection. Additionally, the documentation needs enhancement to pr...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Web Gateway?
The typical use case for our clients is cloud security.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Netskope CASB
McAfee MVISION Cloud, McAfee MVISION Unified Cloud Edge, McAfee Web Gateway, McAfee MVISION CNAPP, and Skyhigh Networks, McAfee Web Gateway
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
NetApp, Genomic Health, Caterpillar, Apollo, Pandora, Continental Resources, Fractal, infinera, Tesla
Western Union.Aetna.DirecTV.Adventist.Equinix.Perrigo.Goodyear.HP.Cargill.Sony.Bank of the West.Prudential.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,900 professionals have used our research since 2012.