I use the solution on a Macintosh computer and it has issues and does not work when I try to log in from the Safari Browser, but it works fine when I log in from the Google Chrome browser. The console has issues when the login is done through a Safari Browser. The console has to be more competitive and the compatibility of the browser needs to be better. I want to know about Skyhigh's competitiveness with other brands and about the vulnerability assessment and micro segmentations. I know Skyhigh has other products, but right now, I am studying what this new product is about. They only have English support, so I would like for them to add some Spanish support.
Delivery Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 10
2023-03-09T22:03:30Z
Mar 9, 2023
The secure gateway could be improved. If they worked on that they would be more competitive. They should offer more learning opportunities. If they could provide tools to help users interested in learning more about the technology, that would be ideal.
Technical Architect at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2023-01-25T14:51:56Z
Jan 25, 2023
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. Backups could be more automated. I have to manually back up all the policies and I can't schedule this. That is a pain. I must remind myself to back up the policies weekly.
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. I'd like to see proper branding in the next release of Skyhigh Security. for example, if I know the product and I have training materials, that would give me the confidence to recommend it to customers. Skyhigh Security should send marketing emails to people, especially architects, explaining what the product is about, its features, and where to get training materials on Skyhigh Security. A free lab available with the basic features of Skyhigh Security would also be great, so anyone can log in and check the product within the vendor site. It's just making one small lab that anyone could click on to access the product and see how basic features work. Currently, when you download Skyhigh Security, there are minimal resources for testing it, and if I don't know the product, why would I purchase it for testing? Through a small lab or trial, you can go and log in and say, "This is an excellent product, so I'm going to purchase it, then install it in my production environment." The on-premise version of Skyhigh Security can be integrated with cloud solutions. Still, it would be great if Skyhigh Security could be deployed on the cloud and proactively monitor on-premises integration, so customers who don't have on-premises infrastructure could also deploy Skyhigh Security on the cloud to integrate with both on-premises and cloud solutions. If Skyhigh Security can work in both environments, that would be nice because you can manage everything from a single product. Another feature I'd like to see in Skyhigh Security is the auto repair feature, which enables the product to repair itself whenever there's an issue. For example, suppose Skyhigh Security is used on a three-node cluster, and most of the cluster is down. In that case, the product should be able to re-trigger another node and create that node automatically. If one instance is down, Skyhigh Security should automatically create another instance. No product in the market currently supports auto repair, so if that feature is available in Skyhigh Security, many customer issues, such as breakdowns or downtimes, would be solved. The auto repair feature would also make Skyhigh Security good for DR (Disaster Recovery), and that would lessen customers' worry about production. Customers will confidently say, "Okay, the product is down, but Skyhigh Security will automatically repair it, so I won't need to worry about it."
Information Security Leader at Alcaldía de Medellín
Real User
Top 10
2022-09-14T05:40:15Z
Sep 14, 2022
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.
Network Security Engineer at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
2022-05-22T05:59:13Z
May 22, 2022
They could be integrated with CASB. I think normally McAfee has this solution in the cloud, but for us the best is on-premise. Perhaps in this year's configuration, something that could be added is the SSL inspection.
McAfee Web Gateway has two kinds of solutions, one is for on-premises and the other is virtual. Their virtual solution is not as strong as their on-premises solution.
Security Engineer at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Real User
2020-09-10T07:35:36Z
Sep 10, 2020
I think it's a very good product although the user interface is not very intuitive and could be improved. Because of its sophistication, it's not so easy to manage and you have to learn to use it well. The solution can't really be simplified because then it would not be so customizable. You have to know what you're doing. If you don't know about filtering, you won't be able to use it well. I also think that the URL filter model and the web application filter model should be more tightly coupled but it's a lot of effort to get them to work together, not an easy problem. It's two different models - URL filtering and web application filtering.
Vice President - Risk Management, Chief Information Security Officer at WNS Global Services
Real User
2020-05-14T10:16:17Z
May 14, 2020
The cloud capability needs to be improved in terms of scalability. More generally, both scalability and performance on the cloud need to be improved. The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP. We would like to have integration with Shadow IT analytics.
Skyhigh Security protects organizations with cloud-based Zero Trust security solutions that are both data-aware and simple to use. Skyhigh’s Security Service Edge portfolio goes beyond data access and focuses on data use, allowing organizations to collaborate from any device and from anywhere without sacrificing security, while providing the visibility and control required to monitor and mitigate security risks.
The Skyhigh Security Service Edge portfolio includes Skyhigh...
I use the solution on a Macintosh computer and it has issues and does not work when I try to log in from the Safari Browser, but it works fine when I log in from the Google Chrome browser. The console has issues when the login is done through a Safari Browser. The console has to be more competitive and the compatibility of the browser needs to be better. I want to know about Skyhigh's competitiveness with other brands and about the vulnerability assessment and micro segmentations. I know Skyhigh has other products, but right now, I am studying what this new product is about. 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. In the next release, I would like to see some seeking functions so we can see origination.
The secure gateway could be improved. If they worked on that they would be more competitive. They should offer more learning opportunities. If they could provide tools to help users interested in learning more about the technology, that would be ideal.
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. Backups could be more automated. I have to manually back up all the policies and I can't schedule this. That is a pain. I must remind myself to back up the policies weekly.
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. I'd like to see proper branding in the next release of Skyhigh Security. for example, if I know the product and I have training materials, that would give me the confidence to recommend it to customers. Skyhigh Security should send marketing emails to people, especially architects, explaining what the product is about, its features, and where to get training materials on Skyhigh Security. A free lab available with the basic features of Skyhigh Security would also be great, so anyone can log in and check the product within the vendor site. It's just making one small lab that anyone could click on to access the product and see how basic features work. Currently, when you download Skyhigh Security, there are minimal resources for testing it, and if I don't know the product, why would I purchase it for testing? Through a small lab or trial, you can go and log in and say, "This is an excellent product, so I'm going to purchase it, then install it in my production environment." The on-premise version of Skyhigh Security can be integrated with cloud solutions. Still, it would be great if Skyhigh Security could be deployed on the cloud and proactively monitor on-premises integration, so customers who don't have on-premises infrastructure could also deploy Skyhigh Security on the cloud to integrate with both on-premises and cloud solutions. If Skyhigh Security can work in both environments, that would be nice because you can manage everything from a single product. Another feature I'd like to see in Skyhigh Security is the auto repair feature, which enables the product to repair itself whenever there's an issue. For example, suppose Skyhigh Security is used on a three-node cluster, and most of the cluster is down. In that case, the product should be able to re-trigger another node and create that node automatically. If one instance is down, Skyhigh Security should automatically create another instance. No product in the market currently supports auto repair, so if that feature is available in Skyhigh Security, many customer issues, such as breakdowns or downtimes, would be solved. The auto repair feature would also make Skyhigh Security good for DR (Disaster Recovery), and that would lessen customers' worry about production. Customers will confidently say, "Okay, the product is down, but Skyhigh Security will automatically repair it, so I won't need to worry about it."
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.
They could be integrated with CASB. I think normally McAfee has this solution in the cloud, but for us the best is on-premise. Perhaps in this year's configuration, something that could be added is the SSL inspection.
McAfee Web Gateway has two kinds of solutions, one is for on-premises and the other is virtual. Their virtual solution is not as strong as their on-premises solution.
The documentation could be improved. The documentation could be more detailed with more examples of usage.
I think it's a very good product although the user interface is not very intuitive and could be improved. Because of its sophistication, it's not so easy to manage and you have to learn to use it well. The solution can't really be simplified because then it would not be so customizable. You have to know what you're doing. If you don't know about filtering, you won't be able to use it well. I also think that the URL filter model and the web application filter model should be more tightly coupled but it's a lot of effort to get them to work together, not an easy problem. It's two different models - URL filtering and web application filtering.
The cloud capability needs to be improved in terms of scalability. More generally, both scalability and performance on the cloud need to be improved. The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP. We would like to have integration with Shadow IT analytics.