We performed a comparison between Skyhigh Security and Tenable.sc based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Tenable.sc excels in vulnerability detection, prioritization, and automation accuracy. On the other hand, Skyhigh Security boasts strong URL spam filtering, endpoint protection, and efficient backup features. While Skyhigh lacks SD-WAN, it is a market leader with good technical support and pricing. Tenable.sc has room for improvement in penetration testing, pricing, GUI, reporting, and support accuracy. Meanwhile, Skyhigh Security has deficiencies in support for unsanctioned apps, API integration, pricing, UI, reporting, and backup processes.
Service and Support: Tenable.sc's customer service is uncomplicated with varying satisfaction levels in response times and quality depending on the region. Skyhigh Security's support quality is dependent on the technician and subscription plan with mixed reviews on response times.
Ease of Deployment: Tenable.sc has a straightforward and easy initial setup that can be completed in a day, while Skyhigh Security's setup varies in difficulty and can take anywhere from five minutes to two weeks. Tenable.sc's setup is positively rated, while Skyhigh Security's setup is a mix of straightforward and complex.
Pricing: Tenable.sc charges based on IP addresses and extra fees for support, with differing opinions on pricing. Skyhigh Security has mixed reviews on pricing and licensing, with some finding it expensive and others reasonable, but the hardware is noted as pricey.
ROI: Tenable.sc promises to decrease personnel expenses and ensure a favorable ROI, while Skyhigh Security enhances security measures, reduces the likelihood of data breaches, and improves reputation.
Comparison Results: Tenable.sc is the preferred choice over Skyhigh Security based on the advanced features it offers, including compliance and vulnerability scans, accurate detection, and a risk-based approach. It also provides quick and precise updates, fewer false positives, and more accurate reports.
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"The CSPM module has been the most effective. It was easy to deploy and covered all our accounts through APIs, requiring no agents. Wiz provides instant visibility into high-level risks that we need to address."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"I like Wiz's reporting, and it's easy to do queries. For example, it's pretty simple to find out how many servers we have and the applications installed on each. I like Wiz's security graph because you can use it to see the whole organization even if you have multiple accounts."
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"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."
"Overall, the performance is good."
"All the information available on each service, including its risk assessment."
"The support is excellent."
"The stability is the most valuable feature. We haven't had any issues with the product."
"We have gained a deep insight into our Shadow IT usage as well as the different activities involved in Office 365."
"I personally don't have any issues with the performance or the stability of the solution."
"It's an easy-to-use product."
"The Auto-Remediate feature is good."
"The solution is completely stable and operation is user-friendly."
"Has a great advanced scanning feature."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the vulnerability assessment."
"Tenable's most valuable features are the credential scan, vulnerability reports, and vulnerability ratings (VPR)."
"What is useful to me is being able to fulfill very customized scanning policies. In the clinical environment, because of vendor control, we can't perform credential-vulnerability scanning. And network scans, which I've done before, can cause a lot of impact. Being able to create very customized policies to be able to routinely scan and audit our clinical networks, while simultaneously not causing impact, is important to us."
"The product is our second solution, and we are happy that it meets our requirements."
"I find Tenable SC to be a very scalable product."
"We wish there were a way, beyond providing visibility and automated remediation, to wait on a given remediation, due to a critical aspect, such as the cost associated with a particular upgrade... We would like to see preventive controls that can be applied through Wiz to protect against vulnerabilities that we're not going to be able to remediate immediately."
"Wiz's reporting capabilities could be refined a bit. They are making headway on that, but more executive-style dashboards would be nice. They just implemented a community aspect where you can share documents and feedback. This was something users had been requesting for a while. They are listening to customer feedback and making changes."
"We would like to see improvements to executive-level reporting and data reporting in general, which we understand is being rolled out to the platform."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"The only small pain point has been around some of the logging integrations. Some of the complexities of the script integrations aren't supported with some of the more automated infrastructure components. So, it's not as universal. For example, they have great support for cloud formation and other services, but if you're using another type of management utility or governance language for your infrastructure-as-code automation components, it becomes a little bit trickier to navigate that."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"Needs integration with other technology ecosystems."
"The encrypted disk implementation could be improved. I currently use it from a dongle or USB key with two-factor authentication to access my computer."
"I think that the User Interface could be improved."
"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."
"The Skyhigh for Google Drive interface and policy engine is a bit confusing and limited when compared against other Google Drive CASB capabilities."
"The services take some time to load. It would be helpful if the loading time was reduced."
"The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP."
"The virtual solution requires improvement."
"If I want to have a very low-managed scan policy, it's a lot of work to create something which is very basic. If I use a tool like Nmap, all I have to do is download it, install it, type in the command, and it's good to go. In Security Center, I have to go through a lot of work to create a policy that's very basic."
"The solution should include compliance-based scanning."
"There is not much room for improvement. However, there should be a guide that describes the step-by-step procedures for doing tasks. Otherwise, training is required from a senior guy to a junior guy."
"Tenable SC could be improved with additional connectivity to external company postures and the capability of managing and sustaining agents in the systems directly without additional platforms in the middle."
"A good plugin editor would be a good additional option for the Security Center."
"The GUI could be improved to have all concerns and priorities use the same GUI, allowing them to see all tickets, assign vulnerabilities, and assign variation failures to each member of their team."
"We would like to see the inclusion of external IPs and simplified reporting that's easier to deal with"
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
Skyhigh Security is ranked 13th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 51 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 10th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 48 reviews. Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Skyhigh Security is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Netskope , Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Symantec Proxy and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM and Forescout Platform. See our Skyhigh Security vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.