We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps 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: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is the better choice when compared to Skyhigh Security. Users prefer it because it offers comprehensive threat protection and is easy to install and manage. It also integrates well with other Microsoft technologies and has various pricing options. Many organizations have seen a positive return on investment with Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. In contrast, Skyhigh Security needs to improve in areas such as pricing, virtual solution strength, and technical support. All in all, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is an efficient and cost-effective solution for many organizations.
"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."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is its monitoring."
"Shadow IT discovery is the feature I like the most."
"The most valuable feature is the alerting system."
"The most valuable feature is its policy implementation."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of management. It's important."
"Defender's integration with our identity solutions is critical in our current setup."
"If your business requirements are relatively simple, it can get the job done."
"It's very easy to install and it includes the Intune portal from Microsoft where I can control all the devices from one place."
"It help us monitor high risk services, blocking them, and also feeding them to our egress points."
"Data loss prevention and user behavior analysis are two valuable features."
"Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more."
"It's a great product with solid features."
"It is easy to configure rules."
"It's an easy-to-use product."
"User analytics."
"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."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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."
"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"
"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 response time could be better. It will be helpful if the alerts are even more proactive and we can see more data. Currently, the data is a little bit weak. It is not complete. I can't just see it and completely know which user or which device it is. It takes some effort and time on my part to investigate and isolate a user. It would be great if it is more user-friendly or easy for people to understand."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps' initial setup was quite technical but we were prepared. The time of the implementation depends on the job and how many users are being set up."
"I believe it's only set to be integrated with Microsoft Defender for identity and identity protection. I would like to see it available for use with something like Office 365 Defender. I don't think it's integrated with that yet."
"I would like for it to be available on Mac and for it to support all of the features of Microsoft financing products. It is really for Windows."
"They should continue integration with all other Microsoft security-related products. The integration with all the other products is still ongoing."
"Defender for Cloud apps is primarily useful for Azure apps. It has limited capabilities for applications based on other cloud platforms."
"The technical support team has room for improvement."
"We would like to get more information from the endpoint. I don't get enough detailed information right now on why something failed. There is not enough visibility."
"The documentation could be improved."
"The solution is hard to configure, our team does not have specific training requirements for McAfee making it difficult."
"The performance of the tool can be improved to provide faster report generation."
"I think that the User Interface could be improved."
"Needs integration with other technology ecosystems."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The biggest challenge we have with McAfee is their cross-cloud support."
"Its initial setup could be more straightforward."
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is ranked 2nd in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 30 reviews while Skyhigh Security is ranked 5th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 51 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is rated 8.4, while Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps writes "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and FortiSASE , whereas Skyhigh Security is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Netskope , Symantec Proxy, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Zscaler CASB. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.