We performed a comparison between Skyhigh Security and Symantec Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 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."
"It's an easy-to-use product."
"The risk rating of each cloud application has been very useful. Whenever we discover a new application is use, we are able to quickly determine if this application is safe to use and whether or not we should allow our end users to be able to access it."
"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."
"Offers a very strong URL spam filtering feature."
"Improves creation of security alerts on web proxy logs by having a separate system interpret said logs."
"DLP policies and anomalies."
"The management is very 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."
"In terms of most valuable features, I like the ICAP capability and URL filtering the most."
"It is easy to manage. The graphical user interface is quite easy to navigate, and we don't have any difficulty in using it. It is a good solution."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint security."
"The most valuable features are the website blocking capability and SSL interception."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"It's nice to have it in the cloud where we can pull the reporting together for it so we can see what's happening in machines at different locations."
"It has a faster implementation process compared to other products."
"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"
"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."
"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."
"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 performance of the tool can be improved to provide faster report generation."
"They only have English support, so I would like for them to add some Spanish support."
"The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP."
"Skyhigh Security, as a product, is excellent, but in terms of the right services and support, those are lagging very much, for example, in Trellix. From one hundred, its score has gone down to ten, so ten out of one hundred, otherwise, it's the number one product."
"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."
"User interface could be more intuitive."
"Difficult and time-consuming to deploy and update."
"The reports could be better."
"It's not user-friendly, and we end up making too many phone calls to get things fixed."
"The major challenge is their support. The support from Broadcom is quite poor. It takes forever for them to get back to you, and when they get back to you, they ask you for so much information, which makes it more difficult. That's the only problem I have with Broadcom. This is one of the reasons why we are switching to another solution. Another reason for switching is that we have a plan to adopt solutions in the cloud so that we can offload the administration efforts to the vendor. In future releases, they can improve its reporting and the process for rules creation. They can also improve Broadcom on things such as security information and event management so that from my same platform, I can carry out functions and probably block websites. Such a feature would be nice. Currently, Broadcom is integrated with McAfee to block access to certain sites automatically. It would be nice if they can expand their integration to IBM Resilient Security Orchestration and Automation Response."
"The platform’s data center is not capable of managing most of the traffic."
"There's a need for increased firewall functionality and capabilities. I'm not seeing a competitive Symantec cloud product. Specifically, functionalities with security as filtering from the cloud. I am aware that there is a product, a proxy in the cloud but I have compared it with other vendors and I don't find it that powerful. I think the worst thing that we're experiencing is very poor and inadequate technical support. It seems to me that tech support engineers aren't qualified to fulfill their job duties."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly."
"Depending on the severity of the issue, I think they can be a bit slow - a few days for the low severity cases, but for the severe cases normally they contact you back in a couple of hours."
Skyhigh Security is ranked 12th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 51 reviews while Symantec Secure Web Gateway is ranked 32nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 10 reviews. Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4, while Symantec Secure Web Gateway is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Secure Web Gateway writes "Easy to set up with good features and helpful support". 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 Symantec Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Zscaler Internet Access and Fortinet FortiGate SWG. See our Skyhigh Security vs. Symantec Secure Web Gateway report.
See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.
We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.