Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Skyhigh Security vs iboss comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

iboss
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
5th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
8th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st)
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
18th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
11th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
16th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
19th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.1%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 1.8%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
iboss2.1%
Skyhigh Security1.8%
Other96.1%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Chinthu James - PeerSpot reviewer
Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement
We use the solution to monitor and secure our customers' internet access The solution's best feature is the flexibility of use. The stability of the solution's cloud portal needs improvement. Sometimes, it gets timed out.   We have been using the solution since 2017. We need help accessing a…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."
"We have gained a deep insight into our Shadow IT usage as well as the different activities involved in Office 365."
"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."
"The solution significantly helps in enhancing security management."
"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."
"Tokenization."
"All the information available on each service, including its risk assessment."
"Skyhigh has given us categorization and rating of websites separate from what the web proxy places on the logs."
"What's most valuable in Skyhigh Security is its level of security. Another valuable feature of the solution is threat analysis."
 

Cons

"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"Its pricing could be better."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"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."
"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 initial setup was challenging, and the documentation could be improved to make it easier."
"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."
"They only have English support, so I would like for them to add some Spanish support."
"The tool could improve flexibility with the creation of reports/querying data."
"The services take some time to load. It would be helpful if the loading time was reduced."
"The solution is hard to configure, our team does not have specific training requirements for McAfee making it difficult."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"This is an expensive product, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations."
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"Have a risk-based approach towards pricing."
"The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable."
"The solution is quite expensive. As we take add-ons continuously as per our customer's requirements, there are additional charges."
"The tool is not expensive."
"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil. While iboss performed well, some competitors offered simpler implementati...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our old proxies to cloud proxies, and we did POCs with different giants at that time. ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alternatives available, but they do not perform as well. Since iboss is cloud-based,...
What needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway?
The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection. Additionally, the documentation needs enhancement to provide easier setup for users.
What is your primary use case for McAfee Web Gateway?
The typical use case for our clients is cloud security.
What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Web Gateway?
I would recommend Skyhigh Security to others. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
McAfee MVISION Cloud, McAfee MVISION Unified Cloud Edge, McAfee Web Gateway, McAfee MVISION CNAPP, and Skyhigh Networks, McAfee Web Gateway
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Western Union.Aetna.DirecTV.Adventist.Equinix.Perrigo.Goodyear.HP.Cargill.Sony.Bank of the West.Prudential.
Find out what your peers are saying about Skyhigh Security vs. iboss and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.