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.
"Overall, the performance is good."
"The most valuable features of McAfee Web Gateway are anti-malware, reports, and powerful categorization of web pages."
"User analytics."
"Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more."
"The management is very good."
"I personally don't have any issues with the performance or the stability of the solution."
"The support is excellent."
"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 very useful tool."
"The solution is completely stable and operation is user-friendly."
"It basically reviews our threat landscape vulnerability."
"The solution has a lean and easy-to-use interface that is not confusing to first-time users."
"Support is knowledgeable."
"Tenable Security Center scans networks and gives reports."
"Tenable also helps us to focus resources on the vulnerabilities that are most likely to be exploited. And since it is continuously updated, it allows us to reevaluate quickly if there are new vulnerabilities found..."
"I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network."
"McAfee needs to add more products that could be managed from the cloud."
"An area for improvement in Skyhigh Security is its UI. It needs to be enhanced and made more user-friendly. Right now, the UI of Skyhigh Security is sometimes confusing. For example, my company is deploying Skyhigh Security for a client and integrating it on the cloud, from an on-premises deployment to a hybrid deployment. Though the experience isn't bad, there needs to be more enhancements. Another room for improvement in Skyhigh Security is the limited training resources, especially when you compare it with Cisco, which has many study materials in the market, even free training resources. You'll get limited resources if you search for Skyhigh Security tutorials on Google and YouTube. Because of high-security requirements and the training material for Skyhigh Security not being available, most engineers and architects avoid the product because there'd be a lack of knowledge in configuring and achieving the goals you'd want to reach via the use of Skyhigh Security. The NOC team deploying the product is having difficulty getting training resources for Skyhigh Security. You'll be charged an enormous amount if you search the market for training because of the limited resources available. Skyhigh Security needs to work on marketing and awareness as an improvement to the product."
"You can integrate Skyhigh's rules with Active Directory groups. For example, you can allow access to a specific website for a defined set of users. I can do that, but the rules are not straightforward. It can look up the group in Active Directory. However, it doesn't always find the proper group name. The rule configuration should be simpler and more granular. The admin should be able to map 80 groups in the rules quickly."
"Needs integration with other technology ecosystems."
"The solution is hard to configure, our team does not have specific training requirements for McAfee making it difficult."
"MVISION Cloud is not well known and there should be more information about the solution. There could be integration to local applications."
"Iron out the few bugs that I've seen."
"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."
"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."
"Tenable's reporting engine needs improvement. It needs to be more efficient and add more features."
"Security can always be improved."
"It's good at creating information, it's good creating dashboards, it's good at creating reports, but if you want to take that reporting metadata and put it into another tool, that is a little bit lacking."
"The solution is expensive."
"The biggest issue I have with the solution is when I'm using the scanning it picks up the original DNS of that device. That means, before we image it and actually change the DNS to something within our company structure, it'll just be random numbers and letters and Tenable will stick to that DNS for a long time."
"The solution's user interface has some issues."
"Tenable.sc's user interface could be improved."
Skyhigh Security is ranked 17th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 51 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 11th 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, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Nessus and Horizon3.ai. 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.
