Skyhigh Security Reviews

We implemented Skyhigh for Shadow IT monitoring as well as Microsoft Office 365 real-time auditing. We monitor these on a daily basis and are currently in the process of implementing policies if certain activities are done by our end users.

We have gained a deep insight into our Shadow IT usage as well as the different activities involved in Office 365. Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more.

The risk rating of each cloud application has been very useful. Whenever we discover a new application is use, we are able to quickly determine if this application is safe to use and whether or not we should allow our end users to be able to access it.

Though the Skyhigh Dashboard is processing large amounts of data, the speed of the Dashboard could be improved. Also, it would be nice to be able to get more advanced search functions to filter out data and quickly obtain the data that we need.

Insight into services being accessed and/or used in corporate environment. Additionally, Shadow IT as a whole and provides another set of eyes on web proxy logs.

It has allowed insight into gaps that may exist in current web proxy tool policies. Improves creation of security alerts on web proxy logs by having a separate system interpret said logs.

Skyhigh has given us categorization and rating of websites separate from what the web proxy places on the logs.

The tool could improve flexibility with the creation of reports/querying data. A better search capability, similar to a SIEM, would also allow deeper log analysis.

User analytics.

The user activity identification improved.

The services take some time to load. It would be helpful if the loading time was reduced.

I have been using it for the past few months.

No issues.

No issues.

No issues.

I have not used the support as of now.

No.

I was not a part of the initial setup.

• The user analytics
• Having a full idea about infrastructure

DLP rules.

Having full control of infrastructure.

Iteration process.

Two years.

Yes.

Yes.

No.

Five out of 10.

No.

The support team implemented the solution.

Not applicable.

It is good.

Yes.

• Shadow IT monitoring 
• Sanctioned Cloud App Security

• Shadow IT reporting capabilities
• DLP integration
• Encryption

It has given us visibility into our employees activities and access to cloud apps.

Support for securing more cloud apps.

Two and a half years.

Some issues, but many had to do with the complexity of our deployment and they all have been worked through. 

The Shadow IT portion would sometimes stop processing our proxy logs, but these issues seem to have been fixed.  

No.

It is excellent and top-notch.

No previous solution was used.

For Shadow IT, it was straightforward. 

For Sanctioned App Security deployment, it was a bit more complex. This was primarily due to the amount of integrations we decided to do with the existing technologies we owned, like DLP, SSO, etc., and because of the size of our cloud application.

An in-house team.

Very good.

I don't deal with pricing. Thus, I cannot answer this.

Yes. Netskope, Bitglass, Adallom, and Skyfence.

Make sure you plan your deployment carefully. Break the project into phases. This makes for more wins sooner, which you can report to your upper management. Develop a good rapport with the team who owns the cloud application, so you can get full cooperation from them.

• Prevents unauthorized data being shared from external sources.
• Enforces data loss prevention.
• DLP reporting and deep integration.

• Malware and spam mails
• Attacks from hackers
• Data privacy

Detecting threats.

One year.

No.

No.

No.

A 10 out of 10.

A 10 out of 10.

No.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We implemented in-house.

Our ROI is 150%.

The pricing is reasonable.

No.

Tokenization.

High-risk services.

De-tokenization.

One year.

No.

No.

No.

A 10 out of 10.

An eight out of 10.

No.

We implemented in-house.

The user analytics.

We were able to analyse our user activity, which helped us to identify the associated risks.

Improve the user interface (UI) of the tool and make it user-friendly.

Three years.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

A six out of 10.

A seven out of 10.

No.

I was not part of the setup.

A vendor team did the implementation. I would give them a seven out of 10 on their expertise.

I have no idea of what it is.

No.