We compared Netskope and Skyhigh Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Netskope is the favored option when compared to Skyhigh Security. It has a larger client size and more advanced architectural components. Netskope also offers a wider range of features and is easier to set up initially. Its ability to work with Azure instance IDs, built-in website classification and safety ratings, and ability to classify and manage cloud apps based on compliance are highly valued. Both solutions offer good protection overall, but Netskope offers a strong ROI and is valuable for organizations looking to improve their security posture and compliance with industry regulations.
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The solution is stable."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The detection capability is very nice and lightweight."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"The product's analytics part is pretty fine."
"Netskope's control is user-friendly and comprehensible. It also helps in conveying information effectively as a company, making it crucial for customer satisfaction."
"The interface is good."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"Its deployment is very easy and quick. Their technical support is also very good."
"It also prevents you from writing data to your Gmail and does not allow you to move your data outside of the corporate system. That is the most important feature for me."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward and easy to perform."
"The product has a very high rating from reviewers. It's a well-respected product."
"Box API features with DLP capabilities."
"I personally don't have any issues with the performance or the stability of the solution."
"The management is very good."
"Skyhigh has given us categorization and rating of websites separate from what the web proxy places on the logs."
"Offers a very strong URL spam filtering feature."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"Technical support and the user interface could be improved."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"If we need to allow a process that is blocked by Netskope, we have to manually check the logs to see why it is blocked. This can be time-consuming and inefficient"
"I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution."
"There should be some granular custom roles that are not available. However, this is on the road map. There are many devices that do not have the Zero Trust feature and other enhancements available which they should have."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
"The dashboard performance could be much better and faster, but because it is a complicated product, it takes time for the dashboard to process."
"There isn't really any aspect that is lacking."
"Iron out the few bugs that I've seen."
"They could be integrated with CASB. I think normally McAfee has this solution in the cloud, but for us the best is on-premise."
"User interface could be more intuitive."
"The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable."
"The biggest challenge we have with McAfee is their cross-cloud support."
"The secure gateway could be improved."
"McAfee Web Gateway could improve the reporting. We have the reporting on a separate server and sometimes the database becomes full. These aspects could improve."
Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews while Skyhigh Security is ranked 5th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 51 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". Netskope is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Forcepoint ONE, whereas Skyhigh Security is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Symantec Proxy, Zscaler CASB and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. See our Netskope vs. Skyhigh Security report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.
Hi Tim, I'm currently a student and doing research about cyber security market, may I know how do you narrow your list down to these 5 vendors?
Hi, I am working on both Skyhigh and Netskope. The both has their own unique features. List down your requirement and do the POC with the said products.
Skyhigh is efficiently handling both shadow IT and sanctioned IT applications. DLP, threat protection and access controls are the key features of skyhigh.
Netskope is good in access control.
Regards / Ramesh M
Hello,
The CASB space is booming right now. Everyone is leveraging the cloud for various reasons and having a CASB in place is paramount to security. What CASB to get is really a matter of your business requirements. What exactly are you trying to do? Do you want to get a handle on all the Shadow IT that your company is currently exposed to and set up a plan for such activity? Do you want to apply DLP policies to safeguard your data? Perhaps GDPR and other regulatory issues are forcing you to get into compliance? There are many reasons for adopting a CASB solution, the best place to start is with an Audit of your current traffic and finding out what Shadow IT is present, any related Shadow Data that needs to be monitored, and come up with a plan on how to handle SaaS apps in the cloud. The best CASB vendors out there will offer the audit service as part of the CASB solution. From there, you can design policy and stipulate what cloud apps to sanction, which ones to block, and how to coach users during any suspect activity. The end goal is to keep your users productive and happy while securing your data in cloud apps.
For an unbiased answer, I would direct you to Gartner and Forrester for reports on CASB. They will detail what the landscape looks like, who the vendors are, what the pillars of a good CASB solution should entail, as well as some features and functionality that are specific to the various CASB vendors. Gartner has a CASB overview document that is very handy and they are currently working on a magic quadrant for the existing vendors. Forrester has released a “ForresterWaveCASB” document that dives into the vendors and who they think are the best based on market presence, features, etc.
Of course, Symantec offers a CASB solution that should be added to your list of vendors for review. Do not look at a CASB vendor without looking at Symantec. Currently, Forrester ranks Symantec as the number 1 CASB vendor in the marketplace. Symantec offers the following:
· Cloud app discovery and analysis
· Data governance and protection
· Threat detection and incident response
· A CASB that integrates with Symantec DLP (the industry’s leading DLP solution)
· Integration with endpoint
· Integration with Secure Web Gateway (Blue Coat proxies are the best in the industry)
· Authentication with Symantec VIP
· Field level tokenization and encryption
· File-level encryption
Consider these questions when looking for a CASB vendor:
· What do yo udo when you need to apply consistent DLP policies to data in the cloud and on premise?
· What are your options for encrypting confidential data
· Can you safeguard against confidential data transfer to unsanctioned cloud apps or personal cloud accounts?
· Can the CASB automatically identify and respond when a user account has been compromised?
· Does the CASB automatically classify confidential data or do you have to build a system from scratch?
Netskope is really good. MCAS meets the requirements but lacking features, it is cheaper though. Depends on your requirements, netskope has an optional light weight desktop agent which makes monitoring easy.
Do you have any specific requirements?
we use ciphercloud. basically, all of them handles: office, google, & salesforce. now with the GDPR happening in our european offices they're mainly SAP & ciphercloud is the only one approved by SAP.
At the risk of giving a solution without knowing the situation, some very broadbrush advice would be to look at these vendors in this priority order. That said, given the right environment, any of them could be the best fit. CASB is not a market that is matured with standard architectures and features, so it is advisable to consider the specific requirements before making a decision. Another way to say this is there is not one that is universally superior in most situation.
1. Netskope
2. Skyhigh
3. CipherCloud
4. Bitglass
5. Microsoft Cloud App Security
The ones higher on this list tend to have a greater number of use cases where they do a good job. I don’t feel I can publish pros and cons in this forum.
We have used Skyhigh and its pretty good to handle cloud sanctioned IT applications like Office365, Google APPs and salesforce etc.
Easy to deploy, better application, device and user visibility.
No help on any of these, but thanks for the question. For a holistic approach (because anything less is insufficient), I've begun using Sophos appliances, services, and endpoint protection which all speak with each other and really fortify a network on all fronts. Services take up resources, so be sure to invest in an appliance powerful enough to serve all your endpoints effectively. Hope this helps.