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 solution is stable."
"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."
"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 features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"Netskope's control is user-friendly and comprehensible. It also helps in conveying information effectively as a company, making it crucial for customer satisfaction."
"A very straightforward interface."
"It's one of the top-ranking solutions in the market, and it's very responsive. We are using Netskope, and Netskope provides a load of features for SQL, STP, and traffic control."
"The client size and architectural components in Netskope are far better than other solutions."
"In Azure, we have multiple subscriptions and with every subscription, we add some kind of instance ID. We can work with the instance ID so that we allow all of the instances containing nodules. Everything else, we block. This way, if you go to outlook.com and check your email, if you log in with your company account, the instance ID will show. The network will take action according to the instance ID and say, "You are using the enterprise email. I'll let you surf. I'll let you see your email." But when you try to log in with your own email address, like Hotmail or Gmail, the instance ID will be different. This way we are not completely blocking Outlook, but we are blocking people from accessing their Outlook. We are only allowing the enterprise-level emails, and we are not allowing user-based emails."
"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."
"The product's analytics part is pretty fine."
"The solution offers a better understanding of the real scenario and identifies the cloud apps that are being utilized."
"It's a great product with solid features."
"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."
"Tokenization."
"It gives us visibility into how the data is being used within our cloud environment."
"Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more."
"The most valuable features of McAfee Web Gateway are anti-malware, reports, and powerful categorization of web pages."
"What I found most valuable in Skyhigh Security is its stability. The solution also has good KB articles that make it simple for users to do the deployment of Skyhigh Security themselves, without the need for integrators."
"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."
"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."
"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"
"The configuration and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution."
"Third party integration with other cloud applications could be improved. Sometimes the API won't be working, but Netskope is taking it seriously. They accept all the feature requests, and they are trying to provide whatever we ask from them."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"The dashboard performance could be much better and faster, but because it is a complicated product, it takes time for the dashboard to process."
"The solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"In some cases, when you have a lot of policies, it can get confusing for users and you can get lost in the GUI."
"They could be integrated with CASB. I think normally McAfee has this solution in the cloud, but for us the best is on-premise."
"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."
"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."
"The secure gateway could be improved."
"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."
"There isn't really any aspect that is lacking."
"McAfee needs to add more products that could be managed from the cloud."
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.