We performed a comparison between Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Skyhigh Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Ease of Deployment: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has a straightforward setup process, while Skyhigh Security's setup can be complex and time-consuming, requiring expertise in McAfee products and cloud-based security. Prisma Cloud does not have any such prerequisites.
Features: Prisma Cloud provides a comprehensive cloud security solution that includes continuous compliance monitoring, auto-remediation, and identity-based micro-segmentation. Meanwhile, Skyhigh Security is known for its strong URL spam filtering and efficient backup features. However, it lacks SD-WAN capabilities that are available with Palo Alto's Prisma Cloud. Prisma Cloud needs to enhance its dashboard customization, automation and integration capabilities, alerting process and support, and more. On the other hand, Skyhigh Security needs to improve its virtual solution, integration, encrypted disk implementation, technical support, and more.
Pricing: Prisma Cloud's pricing is complex and based on credits, while Skyhigh Security has mixed reviews on pricing and licensing. While Prisma Cloud is generally considered expensive, it offers excellent value, and there are no hidden costs. However, additional costs for workload security protections and other features may apply. Skyhigh Security's pricing is okay but needs improvement in terms of value and ROI, and it has an annual licensing cost and expensive hardware.
Service and Support: Prisma Cloud's technical support and account managers have received some positive reviews, but slow response times have been a point of frustration for some customers. Similarly, Skyhigh Security's technical support has been helpful for some users, but others have experienced slow response times and unhelpful engineers.
ROI: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Skyhigh Security both offer benefits such as risk reduction, compliance improvement, and enhanced productivity. Prisma Cloud offers faster issue detection and increased risk clarity, while Skyhigh Security provides increased visibility and control over security posture.
Comparison Results: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is the better choice compared to Skyhigh Security. It has comprehensive and effective features, including a management console for easy visibility, continuous cloud compliance monitoring, and identity-based micro-segmentation. Skyhigh Security offers good protection overall, but lacks SD-WAN and has weak API integration and limited training resources.
"When creating cloud infrastructure, Cloud Native Security evaluates the cloud security parameters and how they will impact the organization's risk. It lets us know whether our security parameter conforms to international industry standards. It alerts us about anything that increases our risk, so we can address those vulnerabilities and prevent attacks."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"The CVEs are valuable because we used to have a tool to scan CVEs, at the language level, for the dependencies that our developers had. What is good about Prisma Cloud is that the CVEs are not only from the software layer, but from all layers: the language, the base image, and you also have CVEs from the host. It covers the full base of security."
"The most valuable feature is the continuous cloud compliance monitoring and alerting."
"One of the main reasons we like Prisma Cloud so much is that they also provide an API. You can't expect to give someone an account on Prisma Cloud, or on any tool for that matter, and say, "Go find your things and fix them." It doesn't work like that... We pull down the information from the API that Prisma Cloud provides, which is multi-cloud, multi-account—hundreds and hundreds of different types of alerts graded by severity—and then we can clearly identify that these alerts belong to these people, and they're the people who must remediate them."
"What I found most valuable in Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is the VAS, such as the web application and API security. I feel that VAS adds a lot of value, mainly because it gives visibility through the application layer and threat detection features."
"It provides good visibility and control regardless of the complexity."
"The ability to monitor the artifact repository is one of the most valuable features because we have a disparate set of development processes, but everything tends to land in a common set of artifact repositories. The solution gives us a single point where we can apply security control for monitoring. That's really helpful."
"The application visibility is amazing. For example, sometimes we don't know what a particular custom port is for and what is running on it. The visibility enables us to identify applications, what the protocol is, and what service is behind it. Within Azure, it is doing a great job of providing visibility. We know exactly what is passing through our network. If there is an issue of any sort we are able to quickly detect it and fix the problem."
"The CSPM and CWPP functionalities are pretty good."
"Overall, the performance is good."
"There is [a feature] called cloud registry where we can see a risk assessment for the cloud services being used. If we want to add a new cloud service or a new cloud application, we can check into it and do an assessment through the cloud registry."
"The support is excellent."
"Skyhigh performs well, and we can choose from virtual and hardware plans. We can deploy the ISO on as many virtual machines as possible and easily set up high availability on the web proxy. The location doesn't matter. The user at a site will always access the web proxy for that location. It's suitable for an organization distributed across multiple regions."
"It help us monitor high risk services, blocking them, and also feeding them to our egress points."
"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."
"I personally don't have any issues with the performance or the stability of the solution."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"We've found a lot of false positives."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"We are experiencing problems with Cloud Native Security reporting."
"I export CSV. I cannot export graphs. Restricting it to the CSV format has its own disadvantages. These are all machine IP addresses and information. I cannot change it to the JSON format. The export functionality can be improved."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"There needs to be a mechanism that allows me to manually configure compliance more easily."
"The security automation capabilities are average."
"The IM security has room for improvement."
"The Palo Alto support needs to improve."
"We would like it to have more features from the risk and compliance perspectives."
"Areas like the deployment of their defenders and their central control need manual intervention. They should focus more on automation. They have a very generic case for small companies. However, for bigger companies to work, we have to do a lot of changes to our system to accommodate it. Therefore, they should change their system or deployment models so it can be easy to integrate into existing architectures."
"They need to improve the API gateway."
"More documentation with real-world use cases would be helpful."
"SkyHigh has the ability to place users or groups on a ‘Watchlist’; which allows you to see certain views with these Watchlists users/groups in them. This is great when you are looking at live data but if I wanted to generate a report on "only" the watchlists."
"Support for securing more cloud apps."
"One area for improvement I've seen in Skyhigh Security is that it lacks support for unsanctioned applications, where customers have their applications. Those applications do not come from Microsoft or other popular vendors. For example, Microsoft has support for Teams and it has support for OneDrive, but it doesn't have support for custom applications built by customers. Customers have internal teams building and publishing applications to the external world, but Skyhigh Security doesn't have support for those applications, and this is the main problem I've seen. The solution only supports a pool of applications that are from Microsoft and other major SaaS vendors. McAfee doesn't provide support for custom applications, compared to other vendors who provide it. For example, Bitglass and Netskope both have support for custom applications. Another area for improvement in Skyhigh Security is that its API support is a little weak. I also have not seen a strong integration between the solution and other McAfee products."
"One thing that can be improved is their ability to integrate with other web proxies to discover unsanctioned IP apps."
"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."
"The services take some time to load. It would be helpful if the loading time was reduced."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The only thing we have faced is that sometimes, randomly, the portal becomes too slow."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 82 reviews while Skyhigh Security is ranked 17th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 51 reviews. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "The dashboard is very user-friendly and can be used to generate custom RQL based on user requirements". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, AWS Security Hub and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas Skyhigh Security is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Netskope , Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Symantec Proxy and Menlo Security Remote Browser Isolation. See our Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs. Skyhigh Security report.
See our list of best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors and best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) 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.
