We performed a comparison between Avanan and Skyhigh Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."The most valuable feature is the integration. It's a single console, so we don't have to switch around between multiple products. Another valuable feature is the ease of operations and maintenance."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"The product's scalability is good."
"The technical support is good and quick to resolve issues."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"Does a thorough job of examining email and URLs for malicious content."
"Safe attachments, safe links, policies, and the ability to protect from zero-day threats are the most valuable features."
"The email protection is excellent, especially in terms of anti-phishing policies."
"The ease of installation and the AI capacity of the product are valuable."
"Email encryption enhances end to end security of any data before it passes through the networking system."
"Easy to use for non-technical users."
"This technology is one of Check Point's acquisitions, and it is currently a powerful tool that provides all the protection that is not found in other tools."
"It can retract unsafe emails and remove them from the entire communication channel."
"The customizable rules allow you to change aspects."
"If we look at four to five years ago, we had close to six or eight people click a link in an email per month. Now, we are probably down to about five or six clicks a year, if not less."
"I like Avanan's SmartDLP module. It's seamless, and the administrative overhead is low. We aren't a very sophisticated operation. We just want to reduce our exposure, so we find ThreatCloud helpful. Avanan's acquisition by Check Point was beneficial for them."
"Overall, the performance is good."
"Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more."
"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."
"It's a great product with solid features."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"Box API features with DLP capabilities."
"The stability is the most valuable feature. We haven't had any issues with the product."
"I like the encrypted disk feature and the endpoint protection."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 must improve the overall management style, including the GUI. It also needs to change the filters so that it is easy to whitelist and blacklist data."
"I'd like some additional features any product can give me to protect our environment in a better way."
"Several simulation options are available within 365, and the phishing simulation could be better."
"We need to be able to whitelist data at the backend."
"Microsoft sometimes has downtime, and we'll get several incidents coming in back to back. We have a huge backlog of notifications, many of which may be false positives. However, there might be serious alerts, so we can't risk dismissing all of them at once."
"The phishing and spam filters could use some improvement."
"One area for improvement is support, in terms of being able to reach them and, especially, technical support for configuration."
"The certification training for Defender for 365 needs to be deeper and incorporate Sentinel. I took all the security courses except one, and Sentinel isn't included."
"It should also offer a quick backup in case any email is wrongly quarantined or deleted to ensure no data loss."
"Avanan doesn't cover certain tool segments."
"There are times when we have false positives."
"Sometimes it seemed like the allow list wasn't working. I've created many allow list rules however, they still seem to be blocked; the same is true with the blocked list rules."
"The user experience must be improved."
"The system response in a slow computing device affects performance when sending and receiving emails."
"Familiarization with performance for new teams may take a long time."
"The cost can be reviewed to enable SMEs to acquire it and enjoy great security features."
"User interface could be more intuitive."
"The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP."
"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."
"They only have English support, so I would like for them to add some Spanish support."
"I think that the User Interface could be improved."
"The tool could improve flexibility with the creation of reports/querying data."
"I would like to see more power being given to the admin. In the sense that in case an employee is facing an issue and they want to configure a service, like attaching an email in Gmail, for example, they should be given the option to make the service request and get that configured on the go."
"The solution is hard to configure, our team does not have specific training requirements for McAfee making it difficult."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Avanan is ranked 6th in Email Security with 21 reviews while Skyhigh Security is ranked 6th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 51 reviews. Avanan is rated 9.2, while Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Avanan writes "We've noticed a significant decline from people accidentally or intentionally clicking on things". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". Avanan is most compared with Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, IRONSCALES, Perception Point Advanced Email Security, Abnormal Security and Mimecast Email Security, whereas Skyhigh Security is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Netskope , Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Symantec Proxy and Zscaler CASB.
We monitor all Email Security 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.