Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Skyhigh Security OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Skyhigh Security is #4 ranked solution in CASB solutions, #5 ranked solution in top Web Security Gateways, #5 ranked solution in top Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) tools, #5 ranked solution in top Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) tools, and #7 ranked solution in top Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) tools. PeerSpot users give Skyhigh Security an average rating of 8.6 out of 10. Skyhigh Security is most commonly compared to Netskope CASB: Skyhigh Security vs Netskope CASB. Skyhigh Security is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 73% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 25% of all views.
Skyhigh Security Buyer's Guide

Download the Skyhigh Security Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is Skyhigh Security?

Skyhigh is the leading cloud access security broker (CASB) trusted by over 500 enterprises to securely enable over 16,000 cloud services, including shadow IT and sanctioned IT.

With Skyhigh, organizations leverage a single cross-cloud platform to gain visibility into cloud usage and risks, meet compliance requirements, enforce security policies, and detect and respond to potential threats.

Skyhigh Security was previously known as McAfee MVISION Cloud, Skyhigh, MVision, MVISION Cloud, McAfee Skyhigh Security Cloud, Skyhigh Security Cloud.

Skyhigh Security Customers

Western Union.
Aetna.
DirecTV.
Adventist.
Equinix.
Perrigo.
Goodyear.
HP.
Cargill.
Sony.
Bank of the West.
Prudential.

Skyhigh Security Video

Skyhigh Security Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Skyhigh Security pricing:
  • "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 fine."
  • "This is an expensive product, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations."
  • Skyhigh Security Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Jathin Das - PeerSpot reviewer
    Solutions Architect at Paramount Computer Systems
    Real User
    Has good KB articles that make it simple for users to do the deployment themselves
    Pros and Cons
    • "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."
    • "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."

    What is our primary use case?

    Skyhigh Security is used predominantly as a CWPP, where my customers have workloads in Azure or AWS, which require a workload protection solution and a post-production solution. In terms of Skyhigh Security being a CASB solution, it's for the SaaS applications of my customers, specifically for DLP protection, access control, and UEBA. The use case is based on what the customer gives me, then I would evaluate the requirements and propose a solution.

    What is most valuable?

    Skyhigh Security is not a bad product. It was a market leader. When McAfee acquired it, it was in the top magic quadrant. It is a good product.

    I also like that McAfee has been in the endpoint security market for quite a long time and knows how things work.

    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.

    What needs improvement?

    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 also not closely integrated with other McAfee CWPP products. If you have McAfee-connected security storage that you've built in the past, I have not seen integration between that storage and SkyHigh Security. Integration between the solution and other McAfee products needs improvement, though it may be because SkyHigh Security is an acquired product and is not a homegrown product of McAfee. McAfee may not have invested time with integration, but that is one good idea where McAfee could turn SkyHigh Security into a complete security product, and not just a CASB solution. Integration is really important and could help transform SkyHigh Security into a complete security solution.

    Performance could also be improved in SkyHigh Security because it is the main concern of customers. What's challenging is that the solution has a lot of CPU and requires a lot of memory which affects performance.

    What I'd like to see in the next release of SkyHigh Security is strong integration with third-party products. API integration is also another feature to focus on because everybody is now building APIs.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Skyhigh Security is a stable solution.

    Buyer's Guide
    Skyhigh Security
    September 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Skyhigh Security. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
    635,987 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Skyhigh Security is a scalable solution.

    How are customer service and support?

    My experience in terms of technical support for Skyhigh Security from McAfee has been good, so far.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup for Skyhigh Security was very simple. McAfee products have a straightforward deployment.

    What about the implementation team?

    We implement the solution in-house. Users can also do the deployment themselves because the KB articles for Skyhigh Security are quite good. Anybody can read the KB articles and do the deployment. Deploying the solution is not that complicated.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    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.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I've evaluated SentinelOne and Cybereason.

    What other advice do I have?

    I'm not using Skyhigh Security daily because I just propose it to my customers. I'm involved in presales and consulting activities for the solution, but I get feedback from my customers and I also understand how Skyhigh Security works.

    I've known McAfee products for a long time, including Skyhigh Security, and I've worked with McAfee products for about ten years. I've had interactions with McAfee since 2009. I have Skyhigh Security in my portfolio, and I do the implementation, transition, and transformation for it. I also do these for other McAfee products.

    I don't propose the latest version of Skyhigh Security to my customers. What I propose is the latest stable version that could be N minus one or N minus two. The previous version is more stable than the latest version because, in the latest version, there's always a bug. Product vendors do testing in their environment, but real-time scenarios are quite different, so you will always have issues in the latest version. N minus one or N minus two becomes more stable because you have the four fixes factors, everything applied on top of it for the unexpected or unqualified or untested bugs and that becomes more stable, so that's how I go about it. I never propose the latest version, though McAfee will say it has many functions.

    For one hundred users of Skyhigh Security, only one resource is required. One person can manage all those solutions, but it would still depend on the number of products you're onboarding. If you have four products in the basket, it would require more than one resource, for example, in your core product, I would say 0.5 to 0.25 FC is the maximum required for four hundred users.

    You'll also not get a lot of tickets for Skyhigh Security. You will mostly get tickets from users because of virus alerts and some performance issues. I have not seen the latest ENS version, but there is a performance issue with the ENS. It's not an issue with Skyhigh Security itself, but the ENS part. I hope that has been fixed.

    McAfee is good and has been in the market for fifteen or twenty years, but the products are not innovative. Security has been evolving and there are quite a lot of products on the market. CrowdStrike is younger than Skyhigh Security and started the business after McAfee, but it's capturing the market. Products such as SentinelOne and Cybereason also belong to the same niche and are endpoint security or EDR products, and AV products as well. They are so innovative and very efficient. Based on the latest Mitre Attack Evaluation result, which is a simulation or study that talks about the efficacy and efficiency of the product, and is not something theoretical, rather it is lab simulated, so all the latest versions of APTs or advanced system threats are selected in the lab and the products are tested against those, and if you look at that report, the products that come in the first place are Cybereason and SentinelOne, while McAfee in terms of efficacy is somewhere in the third quadrant. The efficacy is thirty to fifty percent only. If I have one hundred TTP, McAfee is detecting just fifty TTP, and the remaining fifty TTP are missing. I'm talking about the efficacy of the product. Cybereason and SentinelOne have an efficacy that is above eight five to ninety percent, and have one hundred percent detection or visibility on the ATP, while McAfee isn't reaching that percentage or level. That is where McAfee is losing the market. McAfee products are not innovative and stuck in the old ways, while the threats are ever-evolving. McAfee products are not at par with the rest.

    From a technical point of view, I would rate Skyhigh Security eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Other
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Technical Presales Consultant/ Engineer at a wholesaler/distributor with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Excellent integration capabilities, good alerts, and very stable
    Pros and Cons
    • "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."
    • "One thing that can be improved is their ability to integrate with other web proxies to discover unsanctioned IP apps."

    What is our primary use case?

    The solution is basically it's a cloud access security broker. It's basically the leading cloud access security broker in the market. If you are talking about getting controlling access to AWS, Azure or Google cloud, or most of the major cloud providers, they can integrate that to help protect an organization from data loss, breaches, or from unauthorized access in general.

    How has it helped my organization?

    I actually had an encounter with a government entity. They had a lot of their staff leaking government data, and they were using a website, a known website called WeTransfer. It's a Chinese website that's used to transfer big files without you needing to create an account. Users in the company were basically, whenever they wanted to transfer files, doing it through this site and unintentionally leaking data.

    This week, the POC installed the McAfee web gateway, integrated the MVISION Cloud, and got insights. A lot of their business was done on WhatsApp within their systems. An yet, until this moment, they had no visibility over this. Now they have it. Now they know, and they can initiate changes.

    What is most valuable?

    What I really like about the product is something called the ability to view the sanctioned IP apps, which is a major challenge for organizations today. There are sanctioned IP apps or unsanctioned IP apps. In an organization, you will find employees that will use services or applications for the business, which are not authorized by the IT department, and the organization fails to have visibility over this.

    What McAfee can provide is full details into what your users are doing on the cloud. For example, lots of employees may be using WhatsApp for conducting critical business workflows, and yet their organization is not permitting them to use WhatsApp. Without a solution such as this, the company will never find out if they actually are using WhatsApp and to what rates. With MVISION Cloud and their web gateway, companies basically get visibility and insights into what their users are using on the cloud.

    The product has the ability to provide insights and also to advise on misconfigurations on the cloud. For example, I may be a cloud customer and I'm using IS workloads or infrastructure and service workloads on Azure. I may have object storage configured on Azure, however, this object storage didn't get secured properly. It was publicly open. The system can suggest changes to alert you to this item and advise on how to fix the issue.

    With MVISION Cloud, you can actually get detection notices. It will notify you, tell you, hey, be careful. You have object storage that is open to the public. You should lock it down, should have restricted access. You should have some credentials here or there. It will basically act like an advisor for your cloud configuration as well. This is what I really like about it, to be honest. It can tell you if something can go wrong before it happens. It allows you to fix things before situations can get out of hand.

    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.

    Their integration capabilities are vast. They seem to be able to integrate all major clouds. 

    The solution is very stable.

    The solution can scale.

    Technical support has been very helpful.

    What needs improvement?

    The solution is the leader in the market right now. It's hard to consider where it falls short, as it is so far ahead of everything else.

    One thing that can be improved is their ability to integrate with other web proxies to discover unsanctioned IP apps. That can be room for improvement.

    I'd love to see an on-prem version of the product. Instead of McAfee providing the service, it should be also software available for customers in the market to install on their data centers.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution has been very stable. We haven't had issues with it. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It's not software that you can install. Scalability is on McAfee's end. It's not on the end-user or the partner or any of them, as it's a cloud service basically. However, it scales to meet your company's needs.

    We have about ten customers currently using the solution.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support has been very good. It's amazing, especially for the MVISION Cloud portfolio as it's a different team. In general, it's good. We are quite satisfied with their level of support.

    How was the initial setup?

    You don't install the solution. The dashboard comes from McAfee Cloud. You just integrate it with your cloud, and you enter your credentials to your cloud providers. If you want, you can integrate it with an on-premise McAfee web gateway to get insights, shadow IP, sanction IT apps, look for unsanctioned apps, and whatnot. However, it's not software that you can take and install wherever you like. It's a service, basically. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Honestly speaking, there is no competitor for MVISION Cloud. There are competitors in the market, of course, in the CASB market, lots of them. However, there's no one that's reached the level of MVISION Cloud just yet.

    What other advice do I have?

    I don't have much experience with McAfee MVISION Cloud, however, I do have a good understanding of it. I also managed to pitch it and demo it to one customer and sold it a couple of times. 

    It's originally not a McAfee product. It belonged to a company called Skyhigh before, which was acquired by McAfee. 

    I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I don't believe in perfect solutions, however, this is quite good. I haven't ever seen anything quite like it. 

    I'd recommend it to other users. If a company is having workloads on the cloud, whether it be on Office 365 or AWS or Azure or Google cloud or IBM cloud, whatever cloud, it's highly recommended for them to at least consider MVISION Cloud as it can really help them secure their access to their cloud workloads. Especially those customers who have a hybrid cloud. They will most likely want a CASB that will be able to manage both clouds from the same dashboard.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Distributor
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Skyhigh Security
    September 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Skyhigh Security. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
    635,987 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Sr. Sales Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
    MSP
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Easy to use, reliable, and offers a layer of security
    Pros and Cons
    • "They were very, very aggressive in the market to get a new market share or to take over market share while other companies were being broken up."
    • "You have to have some kind of background with cloud-based security, like working with different providers and how to make instances in the clouds and that kind of stuff - including cloud, networking cloud, cloud application development, anything like that is a requirement to be in the CASB space."

    What is our primary use case?

    You can connect to SaaS applications, like Workday, Office 365, or Dropbox. There are hundreds of SaaS applications. A remote user can connect to some kind of gateway or be assisted by a gateway connection from his home, and he would then connect through that gateway to a broker, a broker with basically the CASB as a broker, and the broker would then put that layer of security too.

    What is most valuable?

    A lot of people sell the solution, including Palo Alto. You've got Skyhigh Networks, which was the leader of CASB and then they were acquired by McAfee, and then now they've broken off into Skyhigh Security. They still have the CASB and they're still considered a market leader. 

    They were very, very aggressive in the market to get a new market share or to take over market share while other companies were being broken up.

    It's a really easy product. It is a pretty straightforward product. The only thing that Skyhigh doesn't is what Palo Alto does - they don't do any kind of a software-defined WAN, SD-WAN. If you have different circuits to utilize different bandwidth across different media and also set up redundancy links and that kind of stuff, that's all the SD-WAN. They do not have SD-WAN, Skyhigh Security does not have SD-WAN. Palo Alto does.

    They were real big on the secure services, edge SSE and zero-trust network architecture type deployments. A lot of that stuff coming out of the networking and when things moved to a cloud, you have what's called sanction IP, which is basically, what we always knew as an internal network in all the security and firewalls and everything about that and then as things moved to the cloud, business to business type stuff and then you start having what's called shadow IP. That's when you have to build all the firewall policy infrastructure in the cloud to emulate what we were doing down inside of a business, connecting servers or PCs or network switches and that kind of stuff. However, infrastructure as a service is doing the same type of functions yet they're cloud services and not physical network services, or switches, meaning there's no mounting it in the rack and that kind of stuff.

    What needs improvement?

    You have got a lot of people in the industry now like Netskope and a lot of people in that space. You can't really say one's better than the other. They all were built off the original architecture and what a CASB is, however, maybe they scale better, and maybe their brand of deployment is stronger.

    You have to have some kind of background with cloud-based security, like working with different providers and how to make instances in the clouds and that kind of stuff - including cloud, networking cloud, cloud application development, anything like that is a requirement to be in the CASB space.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability has been good. it's a reliable solution. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    As a cloud solution, it's easily scalable. 

    You can spin up an instance of something in the cloud or cloud providers a lot faster than deploying network infrastructure switches, routers, and all that stuff. Plus, you can tier down. There's a lot of flexibility you can do with cloud services versus native on-prem services.

    How are customer service and support?

    Technical support is okay. We haven't had a problem with them.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I'm also familiar with Palo Alto.

    How was the initial setup?

    You have to have some kind of background with cloud-based security, like working with different providers and how to make instances in the clouds and that kind of stuff - including cloud, networking cloud, cloud application development, anything like that is a requirement to be in the CASB space.

    What other advice do I have?

    There are a lot of testing requirements and things that people have to go through to create in the CASB industry. Netskope didn't get a leg up as they were like the CrowdStrike of the EDRs. 

    I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Senior Vice President IT at AS IT Consulting Pvt. Ltd.
    Reseller
    Has a valuable level of security and threat analysis
    Pros and Cons
    • "What's most valuable in Skyhigh Security is its level of security. Another valuable feature of the solution is threat analysis."
    • "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."

    What is most valuable?

    What's most valuable in Skyhigh Security is its level of security. Another valuable feature of the solution is threat analysis.

    What needs improvement?

    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. Pricing and design are fine, so no further changes are required on those.

    What I'd like to see in the next release of Skyhigh Security is a single console for all the products, for example, under the Trellix portfolio, it would be good if it could be managed by a single console because it's not possible currently. 

    Competition is running much faster than the solution, so to improve Skyhigh Security and catch up to the competition, there's a need to add these additional features into one console.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been working with Skyhigh Security (formerly MVISION Cloud) since the day it was launched, so it's been four or five years now. It's not being used in the organization. My organization sells it, governs, and implements it for clients. My organization is still supporting Skyhigh Security.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Skyhigh Security is a stable solution.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Skyhigh Security is a scalable solution.

    How are customer service and support?

    I'm rating the technical support for Skyhigh Security a zero. Support for the solution is not good, though the tutorials and documentation are excellent. 

    Support is not easy to reach, and the engineer who handles the issue first-hand isn't much aware of the issue. Rather than understanding the issue, he simply told me: "Okay, follow this. What is the version? Is Windows updated? Which version of Windows are you using?" By the time you're done talking with the engineer, the ransomware attack would have happened and people would have lost their data.

    When a person contacts support, he's one hundred percent done with L1 and L2 troubleshooting, but the support team for Skyhigh Security doesn't listen when you tell them that you're already done with L1 and L2 troubleshooting and can now move forward to the next level of troubleshooting and support. Support will do L1 & L2 again, take and capture the logs, then do the analysis, even if you're giving them your analysis, your report. Support will tell you: "No, we don't want this analysis report, though it is the same. We will do it again, and then we will report."

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We compared Skyhigh Security with SentinelOne which is also quite good, but the limitation is there because SentinelOne is just an EDR solution, while Skyhigh Security has many other things to offer. There is no apple to apple comparison possible.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup for Skyhigh Security is simple. Clients can do it themselves because they have already been using the ePolicy server on-premises solution and now are moving out onto Skyhigh Security, and with the added features, they're more comfortable with the setup.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Pricing for Skyhigh Security is fine.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We evaluated SentinelOne.

    What other advice do I have?

    The deployment model for Skyhigh Security depends on the customers. Some customers deploy it via the public cloud, while some deploy it via the hybrid cloud. Customers use the latest version of the solution.

    I'm rating Skyhigh Security ten out of ten. Its current version is 100%.

    I'm recommending Skyhigh Security to others.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Hybrid Cloud
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Milos Tolpa - PeerSpot reviewer
    IT Engineer at FormatPC
    Reseller
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Scalable, flexible, and easy to use
    Pros and Cons
    • "Overall, the performance is good."
    • "McAfee needs to add more products that could be managed from the cloud."

    What is our primary use case?

    If you don't need an on-premises console for central management, this solution works very well. That's its main benefit. It's useful for companies that have a workforce that is dispersed as opposed to in a central location.

    What is most valuable?

    The solution is very easy to use. It's easy to navigate.

    The product has proven itself to be very stable.

    The solution is scalable.

    We find it to be quite flexible.

    Overall, the performance is good.

    Due to the fact that it's in the cloud, you don't have to maintain it. It's maintained by McAfee. You don't need to worry about updates and upgrades.

    What needs improvement?

    McAfee needs to add more products that could be managed from the cloud. At the moment, not all of their endpoint products can be managed from this console. I'd like McAfee endpoint products to be managed from the cloud console. It's my understanding that they do plan to do this. It's just a matter of time. 

    There are still a lot of customers who are demanding on-premise solutions. That's the situation on the ground here. People do not easily switch to cloud products. They're sticking to on-premise solutions so that they can fully control their IT. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We've been using the solution for a few years at this point. We've used it pretty much since it's been in the market.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and the performance is good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The product scales quite well. If you need to expand the solution you can.

    We have several customers on the product currently.

    We would like to increase usage, however, in Serbia, many clients still prefer on-premises solutions.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We don't have a need to use technical support a lot, as we are doing the support for our customers, mainly. However, when we have a ticket, they solve it in a normal amount of time. I'm satisfied. I haven't had any issues at all.

    How was the initial setup?

    There is no installation due to the fact that everything is in the cloud. You can do the installation on the end points, however, that's normal.

    What about the implementation team?

    We're resellers. We can assist our clients in the implementation.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Customers do need to pay a licensing fee in order to use the solution. I cannot speak to the exact price.

    What other advice do I have?

    We are resellers. We have clients using the product.

    I'd recommend the solution to others. I would rate it at a nine out of ten overall.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
    PeerSpot user
    Senior IT Consultant at Yusen Logistics
    Consultant
    Stable, easy to set up, and has the capability to scale as necessary
    Pros and Cons
    • "The product has a very high rating from reviewers. It's a well-respected product."
    • "There isn't really any aspect that is lacking."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use the solution for security purposes. We specifically use it for endpoint protection.

    What is most valuable?

    The product has a very high rating from reviewers. It's a well-respected product.

    The initial setup is pretty simple.

    We've found the scalability potential to be good. Technical support is often helpful.

    The solution is stable and the performance is good.

    What needs improvement?

    We haven't really had any issues with the solution. There isn't really any aspect that is lacking.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using McAfee for about ten or more years at this point. It's been about a decade. it's been a while. However, for this particular solution, it's likely been for about a year. We installed it in 2020.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability has been good so far. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. The performance is good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The scalability seems to be good. A company that would like to expand it, should be able to do si without issues. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support is okay. It's fine, however, it is not consistent.

    How was the initial setup?

    The implementation is very straightforward and very simple. It's not overly complex or difficult. If a company needs to set it up, they shouldn't have any problems.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We looked at Trend Micro as well. We compared it to McAfee and found that McAfee was rated much higher. Due to the higher rating, we went with McAfee. 

    What other advice do I have?

    We are just a customer and an end-user. We do not have a business relationship with McAfee.

    We really like the company, however, and have used them for a long time. We've used them on-premises and recently moved to the cloud.

    Next year, we are preparing to use a new feature of McAfee - an EDR feature.

    Overall, we have been extremely satisfied with this solution. I'd give it five stars. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at a ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Lead - Information Security at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Good support, with many options for deployment model and scalability
    Pros and Cons
    • "The other products that I have evaluated do not have the scalability options that McAfee has."
    • "It needs to be more user-friendly, as it is a little bit complicated to use."

    What is our primary use case?

    My experience with this product is from an evaluation standpoint. Since everybody is adopting cloud technologies such as SaaS, PaaS, and IaaS, they want to ensure that their data is secure. This product can be used to help people access our cloud applications securely, control users, and manage data movement over the cloud with respect to our data classification policies.

    We have conducted a PoC but have not used it in our production environment.

    What is most valuable?

    They provide a variety of options for scalability, where we can use it over the cloud, or we can deploy it on-premises through our proxy. We can also use agent-based installation. Together, from a coverage point of view, the solution is pretty good. The other products that I have evaluated do not have the scalability options that McAfee has.

    What needs improvement?

    It needs to be more user-friendly, as it is a little bit complicated to use.

    They should implement straightforward automation capabilities that include the integration of AI and ML. It should be able to handle solutions quickly whenever a rule has to be created. It should, for example, suggest to the admin that if there is any indication of data corruption then a notification will be sent. In addition, initial steps will be taken to ensure that the data is safe.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We evaluated McAfee MVISION Cloud for a couple of weeks. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is meant for large organizations and it will support more than 10,000 users.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is good and they are customer-friendly. We don't use the support for MVISION Cloud but we use McAfee support for other products, and we are satisfied.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    As part of our evaluation process, we have used several solutions from different vendors.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    This is an expensive product, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations. This is generally the case with McAfree enterprise solutions.

    What other advice do I have?

    This is a product that I recommend.

    I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Security Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    User-friendly with good performance and helpful technical support
    Pros and Cons
    • "It's an easy-to-use product."
    • "The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use the solution for security purposes. McAfee in general is very good for that.

    What is most valuable?

    The solution is stable. The performance has been great.

    It's an easy-to-use product. We find it to be quite user-friendly.

    The scalability of the product is excellent. 

    Overall, we have been very happy with the product. It's been working well.

    The installation was straightforward and pretty simple. 

    What needs improvement?

    The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I"ve been using the solution only for a couple of months at this point. It hasn't been a long period of time just yet. It's still new to me.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The product is quite stable and we have found the performance to be good. It doesn't crash or freeze. there are no bugs or glitches. We are happy with its capabilities.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution can scale if you need it to. A company shouldn't have any issues expanding it.

    We have one or two customers that use it at this time.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We've been satisfied with technical support overall. They have been helpful and responsive. We have no complaints in terms of their overall capabilities.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was not overly complex or difficult. It was straightforward. We found it simple. A company shouldn't face any issues with the implementation.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution could improve the cost a bit.

    You do need to have a license in order to use the solution. I cannot speak to the exact costs.

    What other advice do I have?

    I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten overall. We are pretty happy with its capabilities and have no complaints. 

    I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Skyhigh Security Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: September 2022
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Skyhigh Security Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.