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)
6th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
7th
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)
19th
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) (33rd), ZTNA as a Service (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.4%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope is 11.9%, up from 11.0% 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 (%)
Netskope11.9%
iboss2.4%
Skyhigh Security1.8%
Other83.9%
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

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"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."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"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."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"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."
"Amazing reporting and tracking mechanisms."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is protection."
"Netskope is cloud-native, enabling differentiation of tenants in cloud applications, whether they are enterprise or personal, and provides control over shadow IT access."
"In Azure, we have multiple subscriptions and with every subscription, we add some kind of instance ID. We can work with the instance ID so that we allow all of the instances containing nodules. Everything else, we block. This way, if you go to outlook.com and check your email, if you log in with your company account, the instance ID will show. The network will take action according to the instance ID and say, "You are using the enterprise email. I'll let you surf. I'll let you see your email." But when you try to log in with your own email address, like Hotmail or Gmail, the instance ID will be different. This way we are not completely blocking Outlook, but we are blocking people from accessing their Outlook. We are only allowing the enterprise-level emails, and we are not allowing user-based emails."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"I have found the most useful features to be the Web Secure Gateway, CASB, infrastructural service scanning, and Zero Trust."
"The initial setup is straightforward"
"Technical support is good. They are very helpful and quick to resolve any issues we have."
"The management is very good."
"Skyhigh offers solutions like WLP and CASB. These tools provide instructions and guidelines for enhancing data security. Additionally, they offer additional software solutions for further protection."
"The solution provides great security, higher availability, and policy granularity."
"Skyhigh has given us categorization and rating of websites separate from what the web proxy places on the logs."
"It is easy to configure rules."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"The cloud security features are the most valuable."
"The feature I found most valuable is the API."
 

Cons

"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"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."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"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."
"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"The limitations in Zero Trust's publisher sessions are a concern. Currently, it supports only between 15,000 to 32,000 sessions."
"If we need to allow a process that is blocked by Netskope, we have to manually check the logs to see why it is blocked. This can be time-consuming and inefficient"
"In some cases, when you have a lot of policies, it can get confusing for users and you can get lost in the GUI."
"The right categorization of websites needs improvement. It is important for the solution to correctly categorize websites as genuine or non-genuine, fitting them into the right category."
"I would like to see the product improved, especially in monitoring and security monitoring. It should be more effective so we can better identify cloud access and understand how users are accessing it. We need better visibility on security and cloud storage access."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"Technical support and the user interface could be improved."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"The tool could improve flexibility with the creation of reports/querying data."
"The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection."
"The Skyhigh for Google Drive interface and policy engine is a bit confusing and limited when compared against other Google Drive CASB capabilities."
"The biggest challenge we have with McAfee is their cross-cloud support."
"SkyHigh has the ability to place users or groups on a ‘Watchlist’; which allows you to see certain views with these Watchlists users/groups in them. This is great when you are looking at live data but if I wanted to generate a report on "only" the watchlists."
"It needs to be more user-friendly, as it is a little bit complicated to use."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case."
"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."
"Pricing is a little expensive but it is affordable."
"The pricing is competitive."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The price is in the middle range compared to other solutions."
"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."
"Netskope's pricing is reasonable compared to Microsoft."
"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."
"The solution's hardware is expensive."
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost."
"Pricing for Skyhigh Security is fine."
"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."
"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."
"There is an annual licensing cost to use McAfee Web Gateway. The purchasing of licensing can be difficult for the government sector."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 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.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.