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

Netskope vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Sponsored
 

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
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), ZTNA as a Service (8th)
Netskope
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
3rd
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
11th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
19th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (18th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (32nd), ZTNA as a Service (16th)
 

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 Netskope is 12.2%, up from 10.4% 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 (%)
Netskope12.2%
iboss2.1%
Skyhigh Security1.8%
Other83.9%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Q&A Highlights

TT
Nov 01, 2017
 

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
Benjamin Naranjo - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides secure remote access and web navigation protection with highly customizable features
The most helpful features in Netskope are the data loss prevention module, the anti-malware module, and the integration that it has with Information Rights Management from Microsoft. It has better categorization and more granular features regarding web protection, as it allows me to control HTTP methods. I can publish WhatsApp web for my users as read-only, for example. Other providers cannot; they are only on and off, and do not have the granularity for a website to be read-only. That comes with a downside, which is that they need to regularly update their controls to support those features in those websites.
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

"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"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."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"A very straightforward interface."
"Technical support is good. They are very helpful and quick to resolve any issues we have."
"The interface is good."
"The automation offered by the product is pretty solid."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is that it is a SaaS-delivered solution."
"It's one of the top-ranking solutions in the market, and it's very responsive. We are using Netskope, and Netskope provides a load of features for SQL, STP, and traffic control."
"Netskope is highly scalable and has supported our organization's growth without any challenges."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"It help us monitor high risk services, blocking them, and also feeding them to our egress points."
"The management is very good."
"We have gained a deep insight into our Shadow IT usage as well as the different activities involved in Office 365."
"Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more."
"I personally don't have any issues with the performance or the stability of the solution."
"Good anti-virus filtering, URL categorization, and reporting capabilities."
"The cloud security features are the most valuable."
"The support is excellent."
 

Cons

"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"I would like to see the product improved, especially in monitoring and security monitoring. It should be more effective so we can better identify cloud access and understand how users are accessing it. We need better visibility on security and cloud storage access."
"It needed some fine-tuning on core business sites that we used, which were sensitive to what we term a man-in-the-middle certificate by design. Some sites were not tolerant because they presented as potentially malicious. So, we just had to make some tweaks so that it would bypass or interpret it."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"Compatibility with other proxy polars would be helpful."
"Setting up policies is something that we having been doing, and if the vendor were to provide example use cases that included different implementation options then it would be very useful for us."
"There is currently no DLP on-premises."
"I deduced two points: one for their feature modification and one for the feature maturity of the solution."
"Accuracy could be improved."
"The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable."
"The services take some time to load. It would be helpful if the loading time was reduced."
"The initial setup was challenging, and the documentation could be improved to make it easier."
"It needs to be more user-friendly, as it is a little bit complicated to use."
"Though the Skyhigh Dashboard is processing large amounts of data, the speed of the Dashboard could be improved."
"Support for securing more cloud apps."
"De-tokenization."
"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."
 

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 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."
"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."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"I wasn't involved in the initial discussions about its cost. However, within the next year, by around June, I'll need to review the vendors' quotes. Typically, our procurement team handles the process by issuing an RFP to vendors to get quotes. From there, we evaluate based on pricing and may conduct a proof of concept to assess value."
"I rate the product's price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is low price."
"There is a license required for this solution and there are many licensing models available. For example, what applications are covered as part of the license."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"Netskope's pricing is reasonable compared to Microsoft."
"The price of the solution is fair but it depends on your use case."
"The product's price is average."
"The tool is not expensive."
"Pricing for Skyhigh Security is fine."
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"This is an expensive product, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations."
"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."
"Some of our clients have a perpetual license and pay additional support yearly."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable."
"The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations."
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.
 

Answers from the Community

TT
Nov 1, 2017
Nov 1, 2017
I have only done a peripheral review of CASB vendors in the past few months, but I do agree that the top ones to consider right now are Skyhigh Networks and Netskope. When looking at a CASB, be sure not only to consider if they offer all the right checkboxes, but take a look under the covers to see how they are handling those checkboxes. Sometimes, integration between the components is severe...
2 out of 10 answers
SB
Oct 3, 2017
We have used Skyhigh Networks for three years and very happy with it. Over the years they have added new capabilities. The original service provided an inventory of cloud applications that our internal people accessed as well as statistics and risk ratings and configuration guidance to block access. Over time they added more functions such as "protect" services for cloud applications like Microsoft O365 and Google Apps that provide protection for users regardless of whether they are on our network or anywhere on the Internet. We see the service as very effective and they have improved capabilities over the years such as improved reporting.
EC
Oct 3, 2017
No help on any of these, but thanks for the question. For a holistic approach (because anything less is insufficient), I've begun using Sophos appliances, services, and endpoint protection which all speak with each other and really fortify a network on all fronts. Services take up resources, so be sure to invest in an appliance powerful enough to serve all your endpoints effectively. Hope this helps.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
5%
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 Business15
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
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 Exxon...
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...
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...
Which is better, Zscaler internet access or Netsckope CASB?
We researched Netskope but ultimately chose Zscaler. Netskope is a cloud access security broker that helps identify ...
What do you like most about Netskope CASB?
The product's analytics part is pretty fine.
What needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway?
The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection. Additionally, the documentation needs enhancement to pr...
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
Netskope CASB
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
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.
NetApp, Genomic Health, Caterpillar, Apollo, Pandora, Continental Resources, Fractal, infinera, Tesla
Western Union.Aetna.DirecTV.Adventist.Equinix.Perrigo.Goodyear.HP.Cargill.Sony.Bank of the West.Prudential.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.