Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Netskope and Skyhigh Security are both solutions in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category. Netskope is ranked #19 with an average rating of 8.0, while Skyhigh Security is ranked #18 with an average rating of 7.7. Netskope holds a 2.4% mindshare in WSG, compared to Skyhigh Security’s 2.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Netskope 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 Dec 4, 2024

Skyhigh Security and Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway compete in the cloud security category. Netskope appears to have the upper hand due to its robust threat intelligence and seamless integration capabilities.

Features: Skyhigh Security offers cloud service risk assessment and shadow IT capabilities, providing a comprehensive view of cloud usage risks. It excels in regulatory compliance monitoring and user anomaly detection. Netskope stands out with its integration capabilities, enabling seamless operation across multiple platforms. Its threat intelligence strength and user behavior analytics ensure enhanced security enforcement and ease of integration with SaaS platforms.

Room for Improvement: Skyhigh Security could improve its user interface and speed up report generation for real-time data analysis. Better support for unsanctioned applications and complete third-party integrations are advisable. Netskope’s threat intelligence capabilities can be enhanced. Users suggest improving policy streamlining and expanding DLP features across digital environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Skyhigh Security provides flexible deployment options, such as hybrid, on-premises, and public cloud integrations. Despite mixed reviews on customer service, users find it adaptable. Netskope offers similar flexible deployment and receives mostly positive feedback for its responsive and effective customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Skyhigh Security is seen as costly but offers a subscription-based licensing model valued for its comprehensive cloud protection. Users appreciate its security and ROI. Netskope, perceived as more affordable with lower ownership costs, offers user-number-based licensing. Some find it expensive compared to competitors but worthwhile for its robust capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Skyhigh Security Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Skyhigh Security

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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 January 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.4%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is 2.4%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 2.7%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
iboss	2.4%
Skyhigh Security	2.7%
Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway	2.4%
Other	92.5%

Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

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

Ernst (Eric) Goldman

Owner at Antares Joint Development

Designed to enforce architecture governance, ensuring traceable SaaS traffic

Netskope provides vigorous policy enforcement for SaaS platforms based on how we configure it, but its vulnerability management and threat intelligence capabilities could be stronger. We rely on external sources to become aware of vulnerabilities in major SaaS platforms, which highlights a gap. It would be beneficial if Netskope offered more robust vulnerability management or integrated threat intelligence through in-house development or partnerships. This would allow for a better policy setup without needing external threat intelligence to configure Netskope. Adding these features would enhance its overall value. I would suggest making some minor improvements to the interface to make it more intuitive, but those are primarily cosmetic. In terms of actual features, the only significant enhancement I could think of, besides better threat intelligence, would be for Netskope to assess the general SaaS landscape. This could include a scorecard showing the security posture of various SaaS platforms based on their track record with breaches and vulnerabilities. I understand this could create friction with SaaS providers if some receive poor scores, which might impact their relationship with Netskope. If Netskope were to harness machine learning more effectively and share those models transparently with enterprise customers, this could include making traffic data they already collect available for deeper analytics, allowing customers to gain better insights into employee traffic patterns. It could also assist with network operations by helping to fine-tune performance based on traffic flow, even though the primary purpose of analyzing that data is security-related. Providing more advanced analytics using existing data could significantly enhance its value to enterprises.

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

"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."

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."

"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."

"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

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

"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."

More iboss pros

"The solution's CASB, DLP, and threat protection features are very good."

"The solution has some useful features, such as microservices. They have sandboxing that allows the prevention, encryption, and remote browser isolation."

"It is for secure web trafficking, and it is doing what it needs to do. It allows customers to consolidate and eliminate multiple technologies onto Netskope and just kind of turn the dial and use more features, such as CASB, VPN. SWG is another feature. You can monitor and govern all the traffic."

"Web filtering and DLP are good features."

"Prevents data leakage and protects data."

"We've found the solution to be quite stable."

"We can connect cloud apps and monitor them."

"As Netskope is a cloud-based application, it is possible to analyze and distinguish personal and enterprise instances."

More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway pros

"The product has a very high rating from reviewers. It's a well-respected product."

"It gives us visibility into how the data is being used within our cloud environment."

"They were very, very aggressive in the market to get a new market share or to take over market share while other companies were being broken up."

"The feature I found most valuable is the API."

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

"A stable solution with good support."

"The support is excellent."

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

More Skyhigh Security pros

Cons

"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."

"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."

"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."

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."

"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."

"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."

"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."

More iboss cons

"They should work on marketing material to put out their work with a little more effort."

"There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow."

"Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats."

"Improvement in the solution is required in certain areas where the product does not provide access to its direct end users, who use the portal as an administrator."

"The stability of the solution to be very good. It is not the best and could improve but it is better than other solutions, such as Forcepoint."

"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."

"Since they have the Netskope client, adding some functionality in the endpoint would be good."

"The initial setup is a bit complex in that it takes a lot of time. In order to get the product to work as you need it to, there is a lot of configuration required."

More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway cons

"They only have English support, so I would like for them to add some Spanish support."

"The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP."

"They could be integrated with CASB. I think normally McAfee has this solution in the cloud, but for us the best is on-premise."

"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."

"One thing that can be improved is their ability to integrate with other web proxies to discover unsanctioned IP apps."

"It is an expensive solution."

"MVISION Cloud is not well known and there should be more information about the solution. There could be integration to local applications."

"It needs to be more user-friendly, as it is a little bit complicated to use."

More Skyhigh Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

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

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

"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 pay a licensing fee of $10,000 on a yearly basis."

"The price is average. Because the license is user-based, you can increase it as per the user quantity."

"The license model is based on the number of users. You have the possibility to have 10,000 users if you wish."

"The product is cheap."

"The solution's overall cost is cheaper than regular web security solutions."

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

"The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations."

"Pricing is not out of reach."

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

"The solution's hardware is expensive."

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

"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."

"The tool is not expensive."

More Skyhigh Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

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	8
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	3

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 lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?

Netscope, Zscaler if they continue route they are on now. FIrewalls needs great deal of automation on each end, datac...

See all answers

Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?

Those firewalls that allow extend the perimeter. Nowadays, there is a issue with the static perimeter and all is goin...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway?

It is fairly priced.

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 13% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 7% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Fortinet FortiGate vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 10% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 8% of the time

Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 8% of the time

Prisma Access Browser vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 7% of the time

Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

Compared 5% of the time

More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway Competitors

Netskope vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 10% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 8% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 5% of the time

Forcepoint ONE vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 5% of the time

Symantec Proxy vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 3% of the time

More Skyhigh Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

January 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway

January 2026

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway report

Download Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway product report

Buyer's Guide

Skyhigh Security

January 2026

Download Skyhigh Security product report

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform

No data available

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

Netskope

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

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is a comprehensive cloud-based security solution that provides advanced threat protection, data loss prevention, and web filtering capabilities. It offers real-time visibility and control over web traffic, enabling organizations to enforce policies and protect against web-based threats. The solution uses machine learning and behavioral analysis to detect and block advanced threats, including malware, phishing, and ransomware. It also provides granular control over web access, allowing organizations to block or allow specific websites and applications based on user, group, or location. With Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway, organizations can ensure compliance with industry regulations and protect sensitive data from unauthorized access or exfiltration. The solution is easy to deploy and manage, with a user-friendly interface and centralized policy management.

Netskope

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.

Arrow, Cloudrise, Sainsbury, Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy, CSA, AVX Corporation Nuna, City of San Diego Case, Genomic Health Case Study, Oak Hill Advisors, MaRS Discovery District.

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

Buyer's Guide

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Skyhigh Security

December 2025

Free Report: Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Skyhigh Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Skyhigh Security report.

See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.

We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.