Skyhigh Security Reviews

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.

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.

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.

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

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

I'm also familiar with Palo Alto.

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.

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.

MVISION Cloud can be deployed on the cloud and on-premise.

I am using MVISION Cloud to have visibility for some CLP rules of the access to Office 365 applications.

The most valuable features of MVISION Cloud are the automatic reports and modification incidents.

MVISION Cloud is not well known and there should be more information about the solution. There could be integration to local applications.

In a future release, they could improve by adding Shower IT.

I have been using MVISION Cloud for approximately two years.

MVISION Cloud is a stable solution.

The stability of MVISION Cloud is fine. You can use whatever service with whatever number of users you want. There is a very good map to see all the services that you are receiving. You can always see what is happening, but the users never know if there is anything happening in the back end of the servers.

We have approximately 15 users using this solution in my organization.

I have used the support. They are very good but the speed of their answers could be quicker.

I rate the technical support for MVISION Cloud a four out of five.

The initial setup of MVISION Cloud is simple. From the moment that you have all the requirements, the process only takes five minutes. MVISION Cloud will notify you that they will have a maintenance day, which will take approximately one hour, but you don't notice that they are doing it.

There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable.

I would advise others to understand which of their use case has services that have direct integration with MVISION Cloud. The service is working very well.

I rate MVISION Cloud a nine out of ten.

We have 2 customers using McAfee Web Gateway. It is very useful as a complement to endpoint security. It is used to monitor incoming and outgoing traffic, as well as production.

McAfee has a very strong URL spam filtering feature.

McAfee Web Gateway has two kinds of solutions, one is for on-premises and the other is virtual. Their virtual solution is not as strong as their on-premises solution.

I am a reseller and partner of McAfee. I have been using McAfee Web Gateway for about 5 or 6 years.

It is a very stable solution.

McAfee offers good support.

The initial setup is not straightforward. You must know technology and networking. It would also be helpful if you have some expertise with McAfee products. If you have one person who is certified on McAfee products you can do the setup yourself.

It took approximately 3 days to deploy and implement 2 boxes on-premises. It then takes 5 to 10 days to fine-tune it. In total it takes about two weeks to set up.

Compared to other solutions and their prices, it is a bit on the costly side. However, it is not out of reach. Our customers pay a yearly license.

Although it is costly, I would recommend this solution to anyone. I would rate it a 9 out of 10.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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. 

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.

We use this product for enterprise cloud security. My role is in strategy and security.

We were using MVISION for data protection.

The most valuable feature is the support. It's the best.

MVISION has a really good strategy and the CASB solution is excellent.

We used McAfee MVISION Cloud for two years, but have recently stopped using it.

This is a stable product.

It is definitely scalable.

The support is excellent.

Prior to MVISION, we used dedicated security tools like endpoint protection, virus scan, and so forth.

This is an expensive product, but you have to compare that with other solutions that are on the market. We have a good relationship with McAfee and have a lot of their products, so we do not pay the same price that an end-user would.

We are currently evaluating another product and will not be using MVISION in the future. One of the products that we are looking at is MVISION for the cloud.

We evaluated Netskope, but we were offered a better price for MVISION.

Personally, I have always found that McAfee has good products. This is a product that I recommend. My advice is to compare this product against other solutions to ensure that you receive the features that you want.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are currently using Skyhigh Security with Office 365. We are, however, looking for another similar tool to be able to compare capacities with Skyhigh Security.

Our primary use case is the protection of sensitive information.

The feature I found most valuable is the API.

I think that the User Interface could be improved.

In the next release, I would like to see some seeking functions so we can see origination.

I have been using this solution for about two years.

My impression is that the stability of this solution is good.

My impression is that it's easy to scale this solution. In my opinion, this solution is most suitable for medium-sized businesses.

We have compared solutions and in our opinion, Skyhigh has a good spot on the market as it's a good solution.

My impression is that the initial setup process is both straightforward and complex.

I would rate this solution as a whole an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. I would recommend this solution to other people.

I have been implementing this solution for protection as an ERP solution. I've been using it to protect and implement private apps.

The broader solution is quite useful. They provide service management for a variety of environments, including Office 365, Google, AWS, and Azure. 

It offers very good protection overall.

The management is very good.

We're able to provide the customer with best practices for coding.

It is a stable product.

Technical support is helpful.

The pricing is reasonable. 

The secure gateway could be improved. If they worked on that they would be more competitive.

They should offer more learning opportunities. If they could provide tools to help users interested in learning more about the technology, that would be ideal.

I'd rate the solution for around one year or maybe a bit less.

We have been facing some stability issues. However, via the support team, we're doing okay. It provides accurate warnings if there are some maintenance windows or service upgrades. It helps prevent unexpected disruption. 

I haven't really attempted to scale the solution. 

Technical support is excellent. They are very helpful and responsive. I have no complaints about their level of service. 

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. I'd rate the ease of implementation nine out of ten. It's not overly complex. 

The pricing is good and the licensing is straightforward. I'd rate the affordability nine out of ten. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I like the encrypted disk feature and the endpoint protection.

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've been using MVISION Cloud for seven months.

It is a very stable solution.

We've had problems with scalability. We have 2000 users.

Technical support has been fast.

The initial setup was very complex from a rules point of view. There were problems with integration to the cloud and connecting to EIM solutions.

There are three other good products: Carbon Black, CrowdStrike, and SentinelOne. I think Carbon Black is the best, and I would rate MVISION Cloud at nine on a scale from one to ten.

We use this solution for controlling web content that the users are accessing. It's very good in case situations where you have the use of a VPN connection.

You can control your employees when they are in the office and out of the office, without using a VPN in the same fashion.

The on-premise solution will control them when they are on the corporate network, and when they're off the corporate network, the cloud's gateway will control them. They have the same policies.

It's a great product with solid features.

It's a security appliance and it is quite secure.

They are quite well integrated.

The documentation could be improved. The documentation could be more detailed with more examples of usage.

We have been selling McAfee Web Gateway for four years.

Deployment can be on-premises or on the cloud.

It is a very stable solution.

I don't have any issues with the scalability. You have to do the sizing before they implement it afterward. 

You have other solutions that have to increase the volume of usage.

We have several large clients that are using it.

We are satisfied with technical support.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy to install.

If the client has a lot of demands and depending on their structure or the client's requests, it can be complex to configure.  In general, it is straightforward and easy to configure.

Some of our clients have a perpetual license and pay additional support yearly. 

We don't have any customers that are using subscriptions yet.

I wouldn't say that it is an expensive solution but it's not cheap. We pay for what it's worth.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate McAfee Web Gateway a nine out of ten.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.