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)
7th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), ZTNA as a Service (7th)
Netskope
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
3rd
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
12th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
18th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (18th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (34th), ZTNA as a Service (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.3%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope is 10.9%, down from 11.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 1.8%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Netskope10.9%
iboss2.3%
Skyhigh Security1.8%
Other85.0%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Q&A Highlights

TT
Information Security Specialist at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Nov 01, 2017
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
AV
Cyber security consultant at L&T Technology Services
User-friendly console integrates robust security features for seamless traffic management
Netskope serves as a single web console carrying out multiple functionalities: Zero Trust Network Architecture (ZTNA), Secure Web Gateway (SWG), Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB), Web DLP, and firewall services. I can toggle between these features on a single platform, enhancing ease of use. In comparison, Zscaler requires multiple consoles for managing similar features. Having these functionalities integrated into one dashboard makes Netskope efficient and user-friendly.
EK
Secure at ESCARE COLtd
Secure web access has improved threat protection while certificate management still needs work
It depends on the environment, I think, and I am saying that not all, but in Korea, most of the customers prefer on-premise. The setup and configuration process for Skyhigh Security can be short as a month, but regularly three months, and long as six months. The deployment may last up to half a year. I think analytics are better for understanding security posture, but actually, I was using the Web Gateway, so all the analysis and logs were made by Linux, which I do not prefer because they have so many things to do. It is good for the customer, but not for me. I think with the cloud, cloud SWG, anyone can access through the proxy, which is the good part, and it is something they can tell someone that is their strength. My overall rating for this product is seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"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."
"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"The most helpful features in Netskope are the data loss prevention module, the anti-malware module, and the integration that it has with Information Rights Management from Microsoft."
"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."
"Its deployment is very easy and quick. Their technical support is also very good."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"The cloud enablement feature helps eliminate on-premises infrastructure by adopting Netskope."
"Netskope's control is user-friendly and comprehensible. It also helps in conveying information effectively as a company, making it crucial for customer satisfaction."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is protection."
"It help us monitor high risk services, blocking them, and also feeding them to our egress points."
"What I found most valuable in Skyhigh Security is its stability. The solution also has good KB articles that make it simple for users to do the deployment of Skyhigh Security themselves, without the need for integrators."
"In terms of their compatibility with major cloud providers, in terms of their abilities, capabilities, and features, they exceed everyone's capabilities in the CASB market."
"Tokenization."
"User analytics."
"The management is very good."
"The cloud security features are the most valuable."
"There is [a feature] called cloud registry where we can see a risk assessment for the cloud services being used. If we want to add a new cloud service or a new cloud application, we can check into it and do an assessment through the cloud registry."
 

Cons

"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"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."
"Its pricing could be better."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"The configuration in the cloud model could be improved upon."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"Accuracy could be improved."
"They can focus more on ease of admin, ease of use, and ease of migration. Migration should be simple for companies that are using a different platform and would like to move to Netskope. Everyone looks for a simple migration. They can also focus more on cloud services and cloud trends. They have to see the cloud market, and they should try to compete with Zscaler and other players. They should also work on licensing costs."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"The initial setup is complex and should be simplified."
"Technical support and the user interface could be improved."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"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."
"The Skyhigh for Google Drive interface and policy engine is a bit confusing and limited when compared against other Google Drive CASB capabilities."
"McAfee needs to add more products that could be managed from the cloud."
"It has many gaps, so I think some customers take three months and up to six months for the deployment of Skyhigh Security, and after the deployment, they use it for years."
"The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable."
"The biggest challenge we have with McAfee is their cross-cloud support."
"Iron out the few bugs that I've seen."
"The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"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."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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."
"Netskope is a premium service, and its pricing ranges from medium to expensive."
"The tool's pricing is not too cheap or expensive. However, it can be costly for a small business."
"Pricing is a little expensive but it is affordable."
"The pricing is competitive."
"I recall that the price was considerably cheaper than that of Zscaler. It was around 60,000 AUD for 1,000 users per year and included some training and some premier support offerings. If we wanted to take advantage of the CASB capabilities, then there was an additional subscription fee, for which we didn't have the budget. On price, I would give Netskope a three or four out of five because it's quite expensive, but it offers a lot of value."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case."
"Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable."
"Commercially, I find Skyhigh Security a little costlier, compared to other products such as SentinelOne or Cybereason which are really novelty products. I'm not comparing Skyhigh Security with Trend Micro, but with other products, in particular the new, next-generation products. The price for Skyhigh Security is high in terms of value and ROI. I would rate the product price combined with product efficacy a six out of ten."
"It's an expensive solution."
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"The solution's hardware is expensive."
"The tool is not expensive."
"The solution is quite expensive. As we take add-ons continuously as per our customer's requirements, there are additional charges."
"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
879,425 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

TT
Information Security Specialist at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
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
CTO at a tech company with 11-50 employees
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
President with 1-10 employees
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
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise37
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
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 needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway?
So far, only the certification part caused me some issues and some challenges. The certification requires some improv...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Web Gateway?
I am familiar with Skyhigh and Symantec. The customer's AWS environment is being used, so that understanding is corre...
What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Web Gateway?
It depends on the environment, I think, and I am saying that not all, but in Korea, most of the customers prefer on-p...
 

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: December 2025.
879,425 professionals have used our research since 2012.