We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Skybox Security Suite OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Skybox Security Suite is #5 ranked solution in top Firewall Security Management tools and #7 ranked solution in top Vulnerability Management tools. IT Central Station users give Skybox Security Suite an average rating of 8 out of 10. Skybox Security Suite is most commonly compared to AlgoSec:Skybox Security Suite vs AlgoSec. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 30% of all views.
What is Skybox Security Suite?

The Skybox Security Suite platform combines firewall and network device data with vulnerability and threat intelligence, prioritizing security issues in the context of your unique environment. Powerful attack vector analytics reduce response times and risks, bringing firewall, vulnerability and threat management processes for complex networks under control.

Firewall Assurance brings all firewalls into one normalized view, continuously monitoring policy compliance, optimizing firewall rulesets and finding attack vectors that others miss. Skybox covers the most comprehensive list of firewall vendors, complex rulesets, even virtual and cloud-based firewalls. With proven scalability in 1,500+ firewall deployments, Firewall Assurance keeps rules optimized and ensures changes don’t introduce new risk. 

Gain total visibility of the vulnerabilities in your attack surface without waiting for a scan. Leverage Skybox Research Lab's vulnerability and threat intelligence, and automatically correlate it to your unique environment. With network modeling and advanced simulations, pinpoint exposed vulnerabilities and other attack vectors. And use context to prioritize vulnerabilities in terms of actual risk and respond to threats with accuracy and efficiency.

For more information or to view a demo, visit www.skyboxsecurity.com.

Skybox Security Suite Buyer's Guide

Download the Skybox Security Suite Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Skybox Security Suite Customers

ADP, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BT, USAID, Delta Dental, EDF Energy, EMC, HSBC, Johnson & Johnson

Skybox Security Suite Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Skybox Security Suite pricing:
  • "Currently, the licensing costs me about $300 USD for the year. This is a huge amount for my environment."
  • "Licensing is normally on a yearly basis. There may also be a perpetual license. Normally, the customers ask for a lower price. If you want to sell more, you have to think about it."
  • "When compared with other companies, the license is more costly."
  • "The price is not expensive."

Skybox Security Suite Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
AbdulMohsin
Regional Sales Engineer at RedSeal, Inc.
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Rich vulnerability management that is controlled from a single pane of glass, but the network modeling capability needs improvement

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is firewall management."
  • "The Network Assurance, which helps to create the network model, is not so rich."

What is our primary use case?

We are a system integrator and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients. This is one of the vendors that we focus on, from a security standpoint.

Skybox has an amazing portfolio that makes up the security solution. You can onboard your network devices with the network assurance module. This includes layer three, layer two switches, load balancers, and so on. This partially builds the network model for the infrastructure and the entire security platform is built off of that.

How has it helped my organization?

With the combination of the vulnerability management database and third-party integration, vulnerability management is very rich. When you add the network model, Skybox can tell you exactly which vulnerabilities in the infrastructure are exploitable. I have seen examples where there are 7,000 vulnerabilities exposed at one time. This includes highlighting things that are open, or exposed.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is firewall management. It is excellent. It works by onboarding different firewall vendors and together with network assurance, builds a complete network model.

Vulnerability management is very good and it has its own vulnerability database. It gives you the ability to integrate with vulnerability management tools like Nessus, which is used by Tenable, Rapid7, and Qualys. The vulnerability software also integrates with endpoint software such as Symantec, Trend Micro, and McAfee. This is important because in this era, the biggest threat is from the endpoint. This is where most of the attacks are coming from these days.

Skybox integrates with patch management, which contributes to the broad functionality.

Everything is controlled from a single pane of glass.

The Skybox Suite includes change management, which makes up part of the complete security solution.

Skybox Horizon is a dashboard that shows you all of the modules. It is nice because it can show granularity at the level of interest for the NOC or SOC, but it can also give executive dashboarding for the VP or CTO at a business level that is not as concerned about the details.

The out-of-the-box compliance is very good, as it handles PCI and ISO.

What needs improvement?

The Network Assurance, which helps to create the network model, is not so rich. It tells you the best part, and it gives you the alternate routes that are available based on the configuration and the routing table, but it doesn't give you the analytics. One of the issues with security is that if the network model is incorrect then no matter what I add on top of it, it's going to be of no use. Network modeling is the foundation for vulnerability management, test management, firewall management, and change management.

The focus on risk analytics is not very good and should be improved. It relies on the CVSS (Common Vulnerability Security Score), which gives you a vulnerability score based on the standard. The difficulty with this is that sometimes, risks are based on critical assets, and these can differ between environments. My critical assets, for example, may be different than those of my customers. As such, it doesn't give you a fully-fledged risk score. On top of this, it doesn't give you the flexibility to configure a set of weights to adjust the criticality of the assets, the users, and the entities within the infrastructure.

Another area where Skybox lacks is the calculation for combinations and permutations of traffic from each interface. For example, in RedSeal, if traffic comes in from one interface and doesn't go out the desired interface, you can see what is vulnerable, what the vulnerability is, what is exposed, what is exploitable, whether it is subject to an insider threat or an outside threat, what the criticality is, and so on. It is all related to network modeling and seeing what happens when an interface goes down. In general, it needs to be enhanced.

They have to improve their integration with vulnerability management tools. It is good with some products, such as Tenable, but not really good with Rapid7.

Technical support can be improved in some regards because certain teams are better than others.

There is no dashboard for ISR compliance or NESA compliance.

For how long have I used the solution?

3 years

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Skybox Suite is an unstable solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This is a scalable solution.

In the region that I am working in, the director has indicated that we want to target organizations with a minimum of 15 firewalls and 500 devices. Essentially, the networks are very big, the firewalls and devices might be from different vendors, and the operations teams are having trouble managing them.

Skybox, from a scalability perspective, is only for customers with a very large environment that is complex.

Scalability is also a factor when a customer is migrating to the cloud. Specifically, when transitioning from on-premises to the cloud the customer will need cloud-based firewalls, load balancing, sandboxing, etc. This means that the network map in Skybox needs to include the cloud.

How are customer service and support?

When I am working on a deployment or on a PoC, and I see an issue with the software that is not related to the configuration, I open a ticket with the support team.

I am not always satisfied with the support that they provide. In general, I am satisfied, but there are different teams within Skybox that handle different modules. The firewall management team is the best, the network assurance team is very good, and the vulnerability and threat management team is not so good. Sometimes, I get the wrong person and I have to escalate the ticket to the highest priority and get the engineering team on it. With change management, I have only had technical support in regards to a single client.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward, as you have a template for the network assurance.

This solution can be installed on-premises or as a cloud-based deployment with the virtual edition. The architecture for the latter is very simple. In a small environment with less than 1,000 devices, you can use one server, install the software, and it has a database associated with it. You just have to make sure that it can be accessed by every device across the VLAN.

The tricky part of the configuration has to do with vulnerability management, threat management, and change management. When it comes to difficulty, change management is the hardest one when it comes to configuration. The reason for this is that customers normally have their own change management solution, such as ServiceNow and they are not very comfortable offloading the ITSM to do change management. It's a hard shift and a difficult sell. If it is done properly, however, it can automatically identify the vulnerabilities and threats and mitigate them as per the change management policy. Workflows need to be defined. For example, when a firewall change is needed then it needs to know the chain of approval. Since every customer has their own approval or rejection procedure, it has to be based on their requirements.

When it comes to deployment, we use a "Land and Expand" strategy. We land with network assurance and firewall management, which gives the customer a taste of the product. From there, we onboard vulnerability management and threat management. I don't recommend to anybody that they start with this solution full-fledged because it will not necessarily yield a better ROI.

For a network of perhaps a thousand network devices, if all of the ports are open and the permissions are in place, then it should not take longer than two days. You can take one extra day for fine-tuning, but three days is more than enough. After this, it will take another two days for firewall management. When we consider the vulnerability management and threat management modules, we have to take them on a case-by-case basis.

Sometimes, a customer will not have a vulnerability management tool like Tenable or Rapid7, so we rely solely on the Skybox vulnerability database. We also integrate with endpoint solutions because of the importance of protecting them. As an example, if the customer is using McAfee for the endpoint protection then it will take me around three days to complete the integration. Certain vendors do not provide out of the box integration, so we have to use the API, which adds to the time required for deployment. Often, it can be done in three days.

Finally, change management is a tough thing to do that depends on the use cases. Without this aspect considered, I would say that the deployment can be completed in 15 days. This is all for a typical deployment. If the customer needs customization then it will change the deployment date.

What about the implementation team?

A deployment engineer is a single person and I can do the deployment myself. It is not often very complex, as long as things are done correctly from the beginning. The checklist has to be complete, which means that the image has to be stable and the compute that you requested is there. You also need to ensure that the required port numbers for device accessibility are there from the server, and the database is there. Once all of that is in place, the configuration is not difficult.

When it comes to integration, the other vendor has to be available during the same period. It is sometimes difficult to schedule but it is necessary to complete the deployment in a specified timeframe.

What was our ROI?

The ROI would not be good for a smaller company, which is why Skybox is better for large networks. It may take three or four years for a small company to break even.

All of the firewall vendors have their own firewall manager. Fortinet, for example has FortiManager, whereas Palo Alto has Panorama. If a customer has only four firewalls and they are all from Fortinet then it makes more sense for them just to use FortiManager.

The value really comes in when there are a large number of firewalls and they are from different vendors. This is where 360-degree visibility really starts to help. When you see the amount of time it saves, this is where the ROI becomes obvious.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I have been evaluating other options including RedSeal, AlgoSec, Tufin, and FireMon. Each vendor has its own strengths and weaknesses. I think that the network modeling capability in RedSeal is far ahead of the rest. Also, in terms of vulnerability management, RedSeal is amazing.

FireMon is really lacking in terms of network modeling.

My best choice is RedSeal.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to anybody who is implementing this product is to make sure that they utilize it. The usage of it should be mandated for the NOC and SOC. They should use a single dashboard to take care of all of your infrastructure components.

When a Skybox representative visits to discuss this solution, it is important to discuss the use cases properly. Have a good project plan and it is also very important to have the right partner. They should be certified, trained, and involved at all stages.

Overall, it is a pretty good product. When you use it, you will see the benefit of it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
TZ
Business Consultant. at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Reseller
Top 5Leaderboard
Good solution with strong features

Pros and Cons

  • "The features that I have found most valuable with Skybox Security Suite, and this is because I work on the security side, are the firewall assurance, the change manager and the vulnerability control. These three features are the most impressive from Skybox Security."
  • "The initial setup with Skybox Security is hard. You need one or two strong security engineers on your team."

What is our primary use case?

We use the firewall assurance and the network assurance when we use change manager to check any changes in our firewall. We also use FortiGate's firewall for all our company. For six months, until 2020, we used the vulnerability control module to analyze our infrastructure.

For one of my customers, we used firewall assurance, network assurance and change manager - three modules. We optimized the firewall appliance and rules for one of the Ukrainian banks.

How has it helped my organization?

Skybox Security Suite is a great, strong solution. But you need a good engineer with high-level technical skills. For businesses it is a great solution - you look at the pie chart and understand everything. But if we talk about technical expertise, you need one or two technical expertise guys on your team to support this platform. You need to check, understand and discuss all cases and events, analyze these events, and make changes in your infrastructure. In terms of the technical aspect, it's good. For businesses, it is great.

What is most valuable?

The features that I have found most valuable with Skybox Security Suite, and this is because I work on the security side, are the firewall assurance, the change manager and the vulnerability control. These three features are the most impressive from Skybox Security.

In terms of the firewall rules, compliance, and vulnerability control, I need to understand what changes were provided from my IT team. I need to understand how these changes impact our compliance. I need to understand this to make decisions.

In terms of the vulnerability control, we need to understand how changes in our infrastructure impact the security in our company, such as having an open port to LinkedIn or Facebook. This could be very bad for the cybersecurity in our company, because some hackers or some non-loyal employees could make a lot of trouble.

So we need to understand how our changes impact the cybersecurity of our company. And Skybox Security is one of greatest solutions for this because you can see the firewall and the network infrastructure and you understand what's happening and how it could impact your cybersecurity.

What needs improvement?

In terms of what could be improved, I would say support for Cisco Firepower. This is one of the biggest segments in the Ukraine market. Many customers use Cisco Firepower. It is not a good solution for me, but it make sense. The second feature that could be improved is a deeper integration with Palo Alto. One of my customers uses Palo Alto and during the trial period with Skybox Security, we had some issues because when the IT administrator used the rules Skybox Security didn't understand. But it's not really a problem with Skybox Security. This was a problem for the company who used these stupid rules.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Skybox Security Suite for the last 15 months. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In terms of stability, humans write the code. So any solution will have some issues. So yeah, we have one or two issues, but for me, Skybox Security support is one of quicker supports in the world. I am familiar with support from Symantec and from Microsoft, these are bad support-wise. I also know about the support from McAfee and SolarWinds. For me, SolarWinds, Skybox and FireEye have quick, good support.

Support is good for me.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup with Skybox Security is hard. You need one or two strong security engineers on your team. We have that. One of my colleagues has great experience as a cybersecurity engineer officer. So we deployed, but during deployment we asked the Skybox team for support. You need to understand what you are doing and why you are doing it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We use an NFR, not for resale, license because we have a strong relationship with Skybox Security. But Skybox Security sent me yearly support for the license, not monthly.

Skybox Security has good pricing.

If you need something like Skybox, you would pay more money than for a cybersecurity platform, because you need FireMon for firewalls. For firewalls, you would need a subscription to Cisco Tetration, for example, or for something else. These are more expensive solutions in collaboration. So if you want to save money and save time, use Skybox Security.

What other advice do I have?

I would absolutely recommend using Skybox Security.

If you need to check compliance and to understand how your IT teams work, use Skybox Security. If you need understand, like a clear glass of water, how your IT infrastructure works, use Skybox.

Tenable or Qualys or Rapid7 vulnerability controls in your infrastructure could be installed for vulnerability scans. But they don't know what kind of attack could be used or what vector of attack could be used. If you use Skybox you will see the impact, all the issues with your infrastructure and your configuration, and you can quickly change the situation to be more protected from outside and inside attacks.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Skybox Security an eight.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Distributor
Learn what your peers think about Skybox Security Suite. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
554,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
AB
Chief Information Security Officer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Stable with good dashboards and excellent firewall compliance

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution offers very nice dashboards and they've recently added a very good Java-based web interface."
  • "The support could be improved."

What is our primary use case?

I primarily use the solution for my firewall. It offers a firewall compliance test and can check and verify firewall configurations and firewall changes on a daily basis. They also send you information on which are activated and which should be deactivated.

What is most valuable?

The solution is very good at dealing with firewall changes and firewall compliance. For network assurance, you need to know the compliance for your related devices, for example, the configuration and your network and switches. The solution allows you to look for something that is already in review or consultation and provides proper configuration. 

The most important feature in Skybox is the offline attack simulation. It helps you understand what your priorities should be in terms of deployments or patches. It's important to know what is the most important and what is the least, due to the fact that, every day, if you have a large enterprise network, it would be very difficult to install all of the patches on your environment. By having the most important highlights, you can start there and work your way down the list of patches. 

The solution offers very nice dashboards and they've recently added a very good Java-based web interface.

What needs improvement?

The pricing is too high. 

Other competitors provide a solution that rebuilds holes from scratch and rebuilds configurations on all the holes. Skybox does not offer this capability. It's something they should add to their list of features.

The support could be improved. 

The implementation process could be a lot faster and much less complex.

The search functionality could be better. There's no way to exclude items from your search criteria, for example.

They need to find a way to revamp the firewalls in a professional way. They need to figure out a proper implementation strategy for the firewalls.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for six years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is actually okay. We don't have any issues in that sense.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In terms of scalability, if you need anything to be extended in your environment, you have to pay for Skybox security in order for it to be supported. It costs extra money to scale.

We have about 14 people in our organization who use the solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

Support is not the greatest. 

If you need help with a new product or service, they seem to take forever to be able to help you. They'll also not help you unless you are on the newest versions, so they sort-of force upgrades.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was not straightforward at all. In fact, it was quite complex. We took about one and a half years to stabilize Skybox. It took far too much time.

What about the implementation team?

Normally, when you require assistance, like we did, it's via Skybox consultants.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Due to the cost of the solution, I've decided to switch products. I'm already paying a lot and I have to pay a subscription each year. I'm looking for another solution that would less money and could provide the same features.

The pricing is very expensive. If you have the enterprise version, you have multiple products and multiple versions you need to activate. If you need to do a replacement, for example, you'll have to pay for Skybox professional services in order to support your version.

Currently, the licensing costs me about $300 USD for the year. This is a huge amount for my environment.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We were looking at FireMon and another solution previously. It is my understanding that we will be switching to FireMon soon due to the relative costliness of this product. We're going to do a POC on FireMon, and if all the features we need are supported, we're likely to switch.

What other advice do I have?

We're just a customer.

The latest version is 11, however, I am currently one version behind.

For small and medium-sized environments, this may not be the best solution, due to the cost involved. However, if you are an enterprise-level company, this might work well for you.

Overall, I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
DR Goyal
VP Technology at a outsourcing company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Suitable for complex networks, reliable, and good support

Pros and Cons

  • "It can be integrated with a vulnerability management solution. When a client comes, apart from pitching network and firewall change management, we are recommending having vulnerability management. So, rather than just having the audit of the firewall, they can integrate it with their vulnerability management solution, which could be Rapid7, Qualys, or any other solution. This provides them the most value out of the platform. That is the way we are approaching our customer base."
  • "Change Manager can be improved. If they can improve Change Manager so that whatever we want to do on a firewall, we are able to do it through Change Manager, it will be helpful for us. Whenever we are doing a change, it only does them at an L3 and L4 level, but all the firewalls are at the application layer. So, whatever needs to be done on the firewall, we aren't able to get it done through Change Manager. Currently, this functionality is not there because of which we are sometimes losing customers. I can create a role on Layer 3, Layer 4, but when it comes to the application layer, such as configuring and defining URLs or other things at the application level, it can't be done through Change Manager. Customers demand that they should be able to do everything through Change Manager. They don't want to do it through some other mechanism to accomplish their complete change management policy. They don't want to use a firewall manager because sometimes, they don't have any manager. They ask if they can use our solution so that a manager is not required. If Change Manager can do all the management automatically without involving any other manager, it will be great. They can also provide better integration with other managers so that everything can be done through a central point."

What is our primary use case?

Our clients are using it from the firewall assurance perspective. They want to do an audit of their firewalls. So, the use cases are related to policy audit, such as which shadow rules they have and which rules are not getting utilized. 

We are recommending the latest version to our clients because sometimes, a lot of integrations are required with respect to different firewalls and virtual devices. If we are using an old version, some of the things are not getting integrated. That's why we are going with the latest or the latest minus one version.

To my knowledge, most of the deployments that we have done are on-prem.

What is most valuable?

It can be integrated with a vulnerability management solution. When a client comes, apart from pitching network and firewall change management, we are recommending having vulnerability management. So, rather than just having the audit of the firewall, they can integrate it with their vulnerability management solution, which could be Rapid7, Qualys, or any other solution. This provides them the most value out of the platform. That is the way we are approaching our customer base.

It is reliable, and their support is good.

What needs improvement?

Change Manager can be improved. If they can improve Change Manager so that whatever we want to do on a firewall, we are able to do it through Change Manager, it will be helpful for us. Whenever we are doing a change, it only does them at an L3 and L4 level, but all the firewalls are at the application layer. So, whatever needs to be done on the firewall, we aren't able to get it done through Change Manager. Currently, this functionality is not there because of which we are sometimes losing customers. I can create a role on Layer 3, Layer 4, but when it comes to the application layer, such as configuring and defining URLs or other things at the application level, it can't be done through Change Manager. Customers demand that they should be able to do everything through Change Manager. They don't want to do it through some other mechanism to accomplish their complete change management policy. They don't want to use a firewall manager because sometimes, they don't have any manager. They ask if they can use our solution so that a manager is not required. If Change Manager can do all the management automatically without involving any other manager, it will be great. They can also provide better integration with other managers so that everything can be done through a central point.

On the OT side, if they can provide more visibility, it would help. We are working on some of the features related to OT, so more visibility would be helpful.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been working with this solution for two to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is reliable. Whatever features are there, they are reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

As of now, we don't have any challenges with scalability. If we are fulfilling all prerequisites, it is okay. 

Earlier, in some of the cases, it was a bit slow, but if we are fulfilling all the requirements, it gives a good performance. For a PoC, when we were using an old platform, the performance was not up to the mark, but when we use the latest platform and hardware, the performance is good.

How are customer service and support?

Their support is good. Support is not a challenge.

How was the initial setup?

It is not complex.

What about the implementation team?

We are acting as a vendor and distributor for Skybox in India. So, our team is taking care of whatever implementations are coming on behalf of Skybox.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Licensing is normally on a yearly basis. There may also be a perpetual license. Normally, the customers ask for a lower price. If you want to sell more, you have to think about it.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend this solution. If you have a complex network with more than 20 firewalls, it is better to go with this solution. It might not be suitable if you have only four or five firewalls, but when the network is complex, or you are managing a data center with a lot of security challenges, I would recommend this solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Distributor
Flag as inappropriate
AP
Information Security Officer at Sony Corporation of America
Real User
Top 20
Stable, with good port division management but requires more automation features

Pros and Cons

  • "The port division management was the solution's most valuable aspect for our organization."
  • "The solution was quite technical. It would be easier to manage if the solution was more specific about aspects of the solution and provided more advisory around how to use it effectively. It would help users a lot if they were more clear about everything."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily used the solution for model sites, on the configuration side of things. We also used it to review certain port services, etc.

What is most valuable?

The port division management was the solution's most valuable aspect for our organization.

What needs improvement?

The solution was quite technical. It would be easier to manage if the solution was more specific about certain aspects and provided more advisory around how to use it effectively. It would help users a lot if they were more clear about everything.

The solution requires more integration in terms of automation features.

It would be great to have proxies, IDs, IPs, firewalls, certain network centers, etc. on the solution. If more of that can be looked at or reviewed from a Skybox standpoint it would be helpful. The solution needs to expand its scope.

For how long have I used the solution?

We had been using the solution for about a year. It hadn't been too long.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

For us, the stability of the solution was okay. Our organization managed to use it just fine.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution isn't great at scalability. I'm not saying it is not scalable, but then, of course, companies have to test and see. For us, when it came to scalability, there were always question marks as to if it could be done effectively. We were never 100% confident in its capabilities. For us, and the environment we worked in, we were somewhat sensitive to scaling with this solution.

There were two types of users for this solution in our organization. One type of user had full access to the tool and they were the leadership team, IT and security. The other type of user had access to automated reports. There were about 200 people who had access to this.

How are customer service and technical support?

We were never in touch with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful they were. We had a team that dealt with technical support, but I don't recall ever hearing from them about how good or bad the service was.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We've since moved from Skybox to another solution, therefore, we aren't using it anymore. About four to six months ago, we migrated from Skybox to another tool called AlgoSec.

What other advice do I have?

I'd advise other companies to scan the solution from time to time and be mindful of it. It's also important to make sure the services of the tool are enabled for the actions a company will need to handle or monitor.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
PG
Asst. Manager Finance at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
User-friendly, extracts data easily, scales well, and it's easy to install

Pros and Cons

  • "It's very supportive and very user-friendly."
  • "The price could be cheaper."

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution for data encryption.

We provide and deploy this solution for our customers and show them how to extract the reports. Our customers are really happy.

If they run into any issues, we resolve their queries.

What is most valuable?

It's a good product. We can extract the data from it very easily.

It's very supportive and very user-friendly.

What needs improvement?

We are not using the solution and rely on customer feedback. If the customer does not provide any, then we can't recommend what could be better.

If they have had any kind of issues, then we are able to know and have it perform better.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for four months.

We are using the latest version.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a stable solution. We haven't had any issues with stability in the four months that we have been using it.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's a scalable product. We scaled our internal projects.

We only have single customers who are using this solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not contacted technical support because we have not any issues.

Our clients have not had any queries. If they do, then we would contact technical support.

How was the initial setup?

It's easy to install and deploy.

It took one month to deploy to all of the branches.

What about the implementation team?

The integration was done by the vendor. We didn't do any kind of integration.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We purchase the license for the product.

Customers do not purchase the license, we take care of that.

When compared with other companies, the license is more costly.

The price could be cheaper.

What other advice do I have?

We have deployed this solution for our clients and have not received any complaints.

I would definitely recommend this solution to others.

I would rate Skybox Security Suite a ten out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
MT
Enterprise Architect - Information Security at a transportation company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Simple to use and scalable but needs more detailed reporting

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution's simplicity of use is its most valuable feature."
  • "The solution needs to add more automation and orchestration capabilities. Those features would make the solution much stronger."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for our management and optimization.

What is most valuable?

The solution's simplicity of use is its most valuable feature.

What needs improvement?

The solution needs more detailed reporting. In Skybox the reporting is good, but it could be improved.

The solution needs to add more automation and orchestration capabilities. Those features would make the solution much stronger.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for about four years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We've found the product to be quite stable. We haven't come across any bugs or glitches. We also haven't experienced any crashes that would lead us to believe there was instability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of the solution is very good. There's nothing stopping a company from expanding if they need to.

How are customer service and technical support?

Reaching out to the solution's technical support wasn't in my remit. I'm the enterprise architect, so I don't get involved in tech support issues.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did evaluate other solutions before choosing this one. In fact, I'd recommend other companies to also take a look at Tufin and AlgoSec. Evaluating each of these will help organizations pick the best solution for their needs.

What other advice do I have?

We're just a customer. We're not a partner or reseller of the solution.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I'd recommend those considering the solution to also look at Tufin and AlgoSec. I'd advise anyone considering any of these three options to compare them together and request a detailed proof of concept.

In general, I'd recommend the product. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Pawan-Kumar
Product specialist at Rah Infotech Pvt Ltd
Reseller
Top 5
A stable and feature-rich solution that is easy to use and supports a large number of vendors

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable features are Firewall Assurance and Vulnerability Control."
  • "The most recent update was not tested with all of the vendors before it was released, so some of the features are misbehaving."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use of this solution is as a firewall and for cybersecurity.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the security solutions that we implement for our customers.

How has it helped my organization?

Our customers have not had any complaints about the Skybox Security Suite.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are Firewall Assurance and Vulnerability Control.

This solution is easy to use.

This device has support for 130 vendors.

What needs improvement?

The most recent update was not tested with all of the vendors before it was released, so some of the features are misbehaving.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Skybox Security Suite for about six months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Our customers have not faced any issues with stability.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not had to contact technical support.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy.

What about the implementation team?

We have an in-house team to deploy this solution. We have four or five engineers who can deploy and perform maintenance.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The price is not expensive.

What other advice do I have?

This solution is pretty good. Our customers have found that Skybox has a lot of good features and I don't expect that any of them will be changing to another product.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Distributor
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Skybox Security Suite Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.