Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Microsoft and Skyhigh Security are both solutions in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category. Microsoft is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.5, while Skyhigh Security is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.7. Microsoft holds a 6.5% mindshare in CASB, compared to Skyhigh Security’s 3.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 91% of Skyhigh Security users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Skyhigh Security and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps are leading contenders in the cloud application security market. Skyhigh Security has an edge in shadow IT capabilities and detailed cloud risk assessments, while Microsoft Defender excels with its integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, offering comprehensive visibility and security features.

Features: Skyhigh Security provides advanced shadow IT detection through proxy log analysis, comprehensive risk assessments for cloud services, and data loss prevention enforcement. Its Cloud Risk Registry and user analytics are crucial for categorizing cloud applications based on risk. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps delivers seamless integration with Microsoft products, robust monitoring of sensitive data and user activities, and real-time alerts for enhanced protection.

Room for Improvement: Skyhigh Security needs to improve console performance, reporting speeds, and user interface functionality. It requires better integration support for unsanctioned applications. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps should enhance its reporting features, user-friendly customization options, and reduce response times for threat detection. It also needs better integration with non-Microsoft solutions and improvements in handling false positives.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Skyhigh Security offers flexible deployment options, including hybrid, on-premises, and public cloud, though its complex setup can impact user experience. It is generally well-regarded for customer service but may have inconsistent technical support. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps boasts wide deployment options, particularly suited for Azure environments, and receives positive feedback for responsive and efficient customer service, especially within Microsoft products.

Pricing and ROI: Skyhigh Security's pricing model requires separate licenses for different services, catering to those focused on shadow IT discovery, and is valued for its detailed assessments despite being costly. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is often bundled with Microsoft 365 suites, presenting a cost-effective option within the Microsoft ecosystem. Though its pricing is higher, seamless integration within the Microsoft suite often justifies the cost for businesses.

To learn more, read our detailed Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,707 peers since 2012

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

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.5%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 6.5%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 3.3%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps	6.5%
iboss	2.5%
Skyhigh Security	3.3%
Other	87.7%

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851

Managing Director

Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment

I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.

Read full review

Frank Van Der Spek

Security and Continuity Manager at Rolinco NV

Deployment has been seamless with insightful data categorization and enhanced control

The features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that I have found most valuable include the overall portal view, with bubble graphs which give us insight into what goes where in the categorization, nowadays with Generative AI but all kinds of categorization, collaboration, etc. That central view of the portal is very useful for us. The impact of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps on our organization's ability to assess and manage app related risks has been significant because we have more visibility. Therefore, we can add more control, and we have already done so. This was not possible in the old solution, in the old CASB solution with Netskope. We now can see on the spot, and we do that almost weekly, what the end users are utilizing, which cloud providers or cloud apps they're using. The visibility into OAuth apps provided by Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is very good. The visibility into risk and risk management of our organization's Generative AI apps is very nice, as you can choose the category Generative AI and then see exactly what traffic has been going to and from Generative AI in the cloud. This makes us very insightful on what is used within the company. We have some policies on blocking specific Generative AI, and we use within our company one particular AI part, which is CoPilot of Microsoft. In this way, we can see what the end users are using other than CoPilot, and that makes us more in control. The effectiveness of the integration of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender XDR and defending against SaaS attacks is very intuitive. It works immediately if we create a new policy or in Purview or in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, or when we make an app unsanctioned by blocking it, then it is almost immediately, or at least within a couple of hours, effective on all the endpoints where the EDR is running. This gives us much better control over things than before.

Read full review

Eunsok Kim

Secure at ESCARE COLtd

Secure web access has improved threat protection while certificate management still needs work

It depends on the environment, I think, and I am saying that not all, but in Korea, most of the customers prefer on-premise. The setup and configuration process for Skyhigh Security can be short as a month, but regularly three months, and long as six months. The deployment may last up to half a year. I think analytics are better for understanding security posture, but actually, I was using the Web Gateway, so all the analysis and logs were made by Linux, which I do not prefer because they have so many things to do. It is good for the customer, but not for me. I think with the cloud, cloud SWG, anyone can access through the proxy, which is the good part, and it is something they can tell someone that is their strength. My overall rating for this product is seven out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."

"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"

"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."

"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."

"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."

"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."

"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."

"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."

More iboss pros

"The feature that helps us in detecting the sensitive information being shared has been very useful. In addition, the feature that allows MCAS to apply policies with SharePoint, Teams, and OneDrive is being used predominantly."

"The impact of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps on our organization's ability to assess and manage app related risks has been significant because we have more visibility."

"The most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps include live, up-to-date information, which provided real-time alerts, and the ability to delve into detailed metadata information."

"The raw logs that come directly from Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps contain all the data I need, and the ability to track activities happening on cloud applications and the alerts provided is an interesting aspect."

"The integration within the entire Defender suite is highly valuable because it allows for communication between different components and offers pretty decent correlations."

"One of the most valuable features is auditing. Some of the other protection services have issues with auditing. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has an excellent auditing technique that helps us avoid the risk of filtering or information loss. You can use different tools to guarantee these things. It allows you to conduct an in-depth exploration of applications, users, and files that are harmful or suspicious. You can also enhance your security setup by creating personalized rules or policies that help you better control traffic in the cloud."

"On-demand scanning is the most valuable feature. In addition, it's a fairly fluid product. It syncs back to the cloud and provides metrics. It's pretty intelligent."

"The product’s most valuable feature is SQL database."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps pros

"The initial setup is fairly straightforward and easy to perform."

"The solution performs well."

"It's an easy-to-use product."

"The threat protection capabilities are very strong."

"Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more."

"Improves creation of security alerts on web proxy logs by having a separate system interpret said logs."

"The support is excellent."

"In my opinion, the best features of Skyhigh Security are that it is easy to recommend because it is not expensive like Symantec, and second is antivirus, and third, I think it is not heavy."

More Skyhigh Security pros

Cons

"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."

"The reporting feature needs improvement."

"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."

"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."

"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."

"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."

"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."

More iboss cons

"The product is very good so far, however, it would be better if it could include more up-to-date threat protection."

"Generally, the pricing can always be improved along with the management system."

"There are some features, such as user navigation content filtering, that are disabled by default, and it probably makes sense to enable them by default."

"I would like to see them include more features in the older licenses. There are some features that are not available, such as preventing or analyzing cloud attacks."

"They need to improve the attack surface reduction (ASR) rules. In the latest version, you can implement ASR rules, which are quite useful, but you have to enable those because if they're not enabled, they flag false positives. In the Defender portal, it logs a block for WMI processes and PowerShell. Apparently, it's because ASR rules are not configured. So, you generally have to enable them to exclude, for example, WMI queries or PowerShell because they have a habit of blocking your security scanners. It's a bit weird that they have to be enabled to be configured, and it's not the other way around."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps' initial setup was quite technical but we were prepared. The time of the implementation depends on the job and how many users are being set up."

"It doesn't actually decrease the time to respond. This has been an issue with Microsoft recently. Sometimes, there is a delay when it comes to getting an alert policy email... Sometimes it takes two or three hours for that email to be sent."

"I believe it's only set to be integrated with Microsoft Defender for identity and identity protection. I would like to see it available for use with something like Office 365 Defender. I don't think it's integrated with that yet."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps cons

"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."

"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."

"There isn't really any aspect that is lacking."

"The secure gateway could be improved."

"User interface could be more intuitive."

"De-tokenization."

"It has many gaps, so I think some customers take three months and up to six months for the deployment of Skyhigh Security, and after the deployment, they use it for years."

"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."

More Skyhigh Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."

"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."

"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."

"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."

"The pricing is in the middle. It isn't too cheap or expensive compared to other antivirus or security products. It is priced according to industry standards."

"Microsoft offers bundle discounts and a pay-as-you-go option."

"The E5 license offers everything bundled. People are moving to Microsoft because you buy one license and it gives you everything."

"I'm not totally involved in the pricing part, but I think its pricing is quite aggressive, and its price is quite similar to Netskope. Netskope has separate licensing fees or additional charges if you want to monitor certain SaaS services, whereas, with MCAS, you get 5,000 applications with their Office 365. It is all bundled, and there's no cost for using that. You only have the operational costs. In the country I am in, it is a bit difficult to get people with the required skill sets."

"The product's pricing seems fair."

"It is a little bit expensive. When you want to have the complete package with Office 365, Defender, and everything else, it is expensive."

"The pricing is fair."

"The price could be better and should be reconsidered."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps pricing and cost advice

"Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost."

"There is an annual licensing cost to use McAfee Web Gateway. The purchasing of licensing can be difficult for the government sector."

"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."

"Have a risk-based approach towards pricing."

"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."

"This is an expensive product, but you have to compare that with other solutions that are on the market."

More Skyhigh Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	10
Large Enterprise	19

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	30
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	37

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?

For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...

See all answers

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 ol...

See all answers

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 alte...

See all answers

Which is the better security solution - Cisco Umbrella or Microsoft Cloud App Security?

Cisco Umbrella is an integral component of the Cisco SASE architecture. It integrates security in a single, cloud-nat...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Cloud App Security?

At the time of implementation, when the size of our organization was small, it was a more affordable product. Since a...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Microsoft Cloud App Security?

The fidelity of the signal in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has been a challenge in some areas. There have been i...

See all answers

What needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway?

So far, only the certification part caused me some issues and some challenges. The certification requires some improv...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for McAfee Web Gateway?

I am familiar with Skyhigh and Symantec. The customer's AWS environment is being used, so that understanding is corre...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Web Gateway?

It depends on the environment, I think, and I am saying that not all, but in Korea, most of the customers prefer on-p...

See all answers

Comparisons

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 12% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

VMware SASE vs iboss

Compared 2% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Zscaler Internet Access vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 13% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 11% of the time

Netskope vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 10% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

Compared 4% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Competitors

Netskope vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 9% of the time

Forcepoint ONE vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 5% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 5% of the time

Avanan vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 5% of the time

FortiSASE vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 4% of the time

More Skyhigh Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

January 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps

January 2026

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps report

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps product report

Buyer's Guide

Skyhigh Security

January 2026

Download Skyhigh Security product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App Security

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

iboss

Demo not available

Microsoft

Skyhigh Security

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is a comprehensive security solution that provides protection for cloud-based applications and services. It offers real-time threat detection and response, as well as advanced analytics and reporting capabilities. With Defender for Cloud Apps, organizations can ensure the security of their cloud environments and safeguard against cyber threats. Whether you're running SaaS applications, IaaS workloads, or PaaS services, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps can help you secure your cloud environment and protect your business from cyber threats.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Benefits:

Provides comprehensive security for cloud applications
Integrates with other Microsoft security tools
Easy to use and deploy
Provides real-time threat detection and response
Strong protection against phishing attacks and other common threats
Highly customizable to meet specific needs of different organizations

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Use Cases:

Governance, authentication, security, and compliance.
Detects shadow IT and anomalous user behavior
Controls access to applications
Provides auditing and filtering setups
Used for end-user compute devices, file monitoring, user investigation, and activity
Used for data governance, threat detection, and getting visibility over cloud applications
Used to identify information about applications beyond organizational boundaries
Prevent exfiltration and data filtration of corporate data
Used to deal with spam emails and detect shadow IT

Reviews from Real Users

Ram-Krish, Cloud Security & Governance at a financial services firm, says that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need".

PeerSpot user, Senior Cloud & Security Consultant at a tech services, writes that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps "Great for monitoring user activity and protecting data while integrating well with other applications".

Simon Burgess,Infrastructure Engineer at SBITSC, states that Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is "A fluid, intelligent product for great visibility, centralized management, and increased uptime".

Microsoft

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 Secure Web Gateway, Skyhigh Cloud Access Security Broker, Skyhigh Private Access, and Skyhigh Cloud Native Application Protection Platform. All solutions form a fully converged, consolidated platform, and are managed from the same single console.

Skyhigh Cloud Access Security Broker protects data and stops threats in the cloud across SaaS, and PaaS, and IaaS environments from a single, cloud-native enforcement point. It enables organizations to accelerate their business by giving them visibility and control over their data in the cloud and protection from threats with a frictionless deployment model.
Skyhigh Secure Web Gateway connects and secures your workforce from malicious websites and cloud apps from anywhere, any application, and any device. It protects users from threats and data loss with integrated Remote Browser Isolation, Cloud Access Security Broker and Data Loss Prevention capabilities while providing the ability to access the web and cloud.
Skyhigh Private Access is the data centric Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) solution that provides integrated Data Loss Prevention scanning and seamless Remote Browser Isolation integration for robust data protection, using Zero Trust principles. Apply a unified policy across web, SaaS, and private apps.
Skyhigh Cloud Native Application Protection Platform is the industry’s first platform to extend Cloud Access Security Broker, bringing application and data context to converge Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with IaaS Data Loss Prevention for IaaS public clouds. Skyhigh CNAPP provides consistent data protection, threat prevention, governance, and compliance throughout the cloud-native application development lifecycle.

Skyhigh Security Benefits

Modern Data Protection. Extensible data protection policies to determine what can be accessed, shared, and how it can be used.
Zero Trust for the Cloud. Extend zero trust to the cloud ensuring that your sensitive data is accessed, shared, and stored appropriately.
Actionable Insights. Unified view of data and risk, regardless of where and how the policy is enforced.

Skyhigh Security Features

99.999% Uptime. Connects users seamlessly and without disruption through Hyperscale Service Edge with cloud-native web security that operates with ultra-low latency and 99.999% uptime.
Remote Browser Isolation. Prevents threats of a web page from reaching endpoints with intelligent, multi-layer remote browser isolation technology that provides secure web browsing through robust machine learning analysis on real-time telemetry.
Cloud Registry. The world’s largest and most accurate registry of cloud services based on a customizable 261-point risk assessment to support risk-aware cloud governance.

Skyhigh Security

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.

Customers for Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps include Accenture, St. Luke’s University Health Network, Ansell, and Nakilat.

Western Union.Aetna.DirecTV.Adventist.Equinix.Perrigo.Goodyear.HP.Cargill.Sony.Bank of the West.Prudential.

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security

February 2026

Free Report: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security report.

See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.