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

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 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 Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
5th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
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
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto ...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
4th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
1st
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
2nd
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (5th)
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
16th
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
12th
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
17th
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.3%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is 11.8%, down from 17.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 2.1%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks11.8%
iboss2.3%
Skyhigh Security2.1%
Other83.8%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
IgorPinter - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at PULSEC
Zero-trust access has improved remote security and now simplifies cloud-based firewall management
Regarding the integration part for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, the integration with identity providers is pretty much good. It is basically firewall as a service, so it performs well. I completed the integration without any issues. What Palo Alto Networks can do better for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is probably to have the point of presence available in more locations. The point of presence from the Serbia region has the nearest POP in Frankfurt, which is an issue since it is your gateway—when you start browsing the internet, you go through a commercial connection in Germany. They definitely need to spread the service in other countries.
KS
Technical Associate Network Security at Valuepoint Systems
Proxy integration has strengthened email security and centralized monitoring for all branches
We have nearly 900 plus branches here, where we have rerouted our traffic through proxy like Trellix Skyhigh Security. We operate in a major financial sector in India, and that is why we use Skyhigh Security to reroute all our traffic via proxy for our security. Only then will it reach our gateway. We monitor all the URLs and the plant IPs in our proxy. We are tracing those IPs to see whether they have a valid code or not. We also check with Trellix Sandbox to determine whether the URL is malicious or not. Additionally, we have included our Cisco Umbrella with our proxy, so the DNS resolution happens on our Umbrella side. We continuously monitor the traffic on our proxy side. The threat protection feature is a major useful thing because for our 900 branches we monitor with this proxy only. If any issue or any URL does not reach, it is quite helpful to check whether the issue is in the proxy side or in the actual end-user side. It is quite easy to monitor. We do not get all those things from the firewall end, and it is quite easy to gather that information from the proxy, which is a major benefit here. It also majorly helps to hide our actual IPs, as we have directed all the IPs from the proxy, making it very helpful to hide our internal servers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"I like it because it's very easy to use. You install the client and you have to know your gateway, but that's something we give to our users. Beyond that, it takes about three seconds to train them on how to use it. And it just works well. That's great for us because it means less administrative time."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to change the gateway. For example, if there's a problem with a specific region or vendor, we can make modifications. The solution is scalable, and there are different gateways that can be created depending on the demand."
"Its hands-off security and the fact that we don't have to maintain it are the most valuable features."
"This is the best product that I have looked at, out of all of the competitors."
"The users can securely access any cloud data centers or cloud platforms. In terms of the features, it has all the features that Palo Alto Next-Generation Firewall has. It is also very stable and scalable."
"The solution improved the consistency of our security controls and the BCP. There has been a 20 percent reduction in TCO. Prisma Access also enabled us to deliver better applications by centralizing security management."
"It protects all app traffic so that users can gain access to all apps. Unlike other solutions that only work from ports 80 and 443, which are predominantly for web traffic, Prisma Access covers all protocols and works on all traffic patterns... The most sophisticated attacks can arise from sources that are not behind 80/443."
"It's great that we can make sure a machine meets the minimum requirements before users are allowed to log in."
"Tokenization."
"The most valuable features of McAfee Web Gateway are anti-malware, reports, and powerful categorization of web pages."
"The other products that I have evaluated do not have the scalability options that McAfee has."
"It makes our work easier."
"Skyhigh has given us categorization and rating of websites separate from what the web proxy places on the logs."
"Skyhigh networks is the most mature and feature-rich product and integrates with your current infrastructure, rather than adding another agent or needing to send all traffic through a proxy, which simplifies setup and ensures the product does not cause bottlenecks while adding value to your already existing security infrastructure."
"The return on investment has been positive."
"Tokenization."
 

Cons

"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."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"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."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"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."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"It would be nice to manage Prisma Access through the cloud instead of through Panorama. You can use the cloud version to monitor Prisma Access, but it doesn't have all the features yet, and it's not 100% done."
"The Cloud Management application has room for improvement. There are a lot of things on the roadmap for that application; things are going to happen soon."
"We've run into some challenges, having hit a lot of bugs over the past year in the deployment of GlobalProtect. We've had our fair share of issues that I haven't been happy with. We're working with the support organization to remediate them and waiting for updated releases. The response on getting the bugs fixed has not been what I would consider adequate for a product like this."
"Sometimes a third-party outage could impact the whole operability."
"The licensing model isn't flexible enough. It's an all-or-nothing model. Other providers in the market allow you to buy modules or add-ons separately. With Prisma Access, you have to purchase the same module for all users."
"There is a lack of integration with third-party solutions like CrowdStrike or SentinelOne in Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. Although they have a tight ecosystem with their products, opening up for integration with other solutions would be beneficial."
"Sometimes, you have these notifications sent out about changes in App-IDs, modifications in App-IDs, or even the introduction of entirely new App-IDs to replace. Sometimes, the recommendations are followed, but even then, when the package is installed on the firewall, it gets messed up. I remember a particular one was with Tableau, and suddenly, people weren't able to use Tableau, which is an analytics tool for business."
"While Palo Alto has understood the essence of building capabilities around cloud technology and have come up with a CASB offering, that is a very new product. There are other companies that have better offerings for understanding cloud applications and have more graceful controls. That's something that Palo Alto needs to work on."
"The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable."
"I would like to see more power being given to the admin."
"There isn't really any aspect that is lacking."
"Even if you narrow down the scope of the report so that there is not too much data, when a report is generating, sometimes it will get hung; thus you have to delete it and run it again."
"The tool could improve flexibility with the creation of reports/querying data."
"They could be integrated with CASB. I think normally McAfee has this solution in the cloud, but for us the best is on-premise."
"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."
"Its capabilities are still rather limited compared to other solutions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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 probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"As compared to other solutions, Prisma Access is much cheaper. It is probably 30% to 40% cheaper than other solutions, but I do not know the exact cost."
"The initial prices of Prisma Access were okay. But as soon as you start deploying Palo Alto gear, the support prices and the recurring prices, which are the major operational costs, tend to increase over time."
"The licensing model for this product is complicated and changes all the time, making it very hard for the user to comprehend the configuration."
"I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution, especially when compared to other solutions like Cisco. There are no additional charges apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution."
"Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks has flexible licensing models with different categories. It comes with different features which can be removed if not needed. However, its pricing is high."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing for this solution is on the higher end."
"Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost."
"Commercially, I find Skyhigh Security a little costlier, compared to other products such as SentinelOne or Cybereason which are really novelty products. I'm not comparing Skyhigh Security with Trend Micro, but with other products, in particular the new, next-generation products. The price for Skyhigh Security is high in terms of value and ROI. I would rate the product price combined with product efficacy a six out of ten."
"Have a risk-based approach towards pricing."
"Some of our clients have a perpetual license and pay additional support yearly."
"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."
"There is an annual licensing cost to use McAfee Web Gateway. The purchasing of licensing can be difficult for the government sector."
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"The tool is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise27
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
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...
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What do you like most about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas of the secure remote access it provides while also being ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks?
From my experience, Palo Alto is more expensive compared to solutions like Netskope and Triscale.
What needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway?
When compared to other technologies, Skyhigh Security is quite simple, but if there is any improvement in the GUI, it...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Web Gateway?
I am currently working on Cisco Email Security Gateway, ESA, and I am also exploring Trellix Skyhigh proxy. I have be...
What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Web Gateway?
For IAM, we are using other tools, as we are a financial institution, so we do not go with a single vendor platform. ...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Prisma Access, GlobalProtect, Palo Alto GlobalProtect Mobile Security Manager, Prisma SaaS by Palo Alto Networks, Prisma Access
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.
Concord Hospital, State of Colorado, Essilor International, RheinLand Versicherungsgruppe, University of Westminster, Universidade Nove de Julho, SPAR Austria, CAME Group, ZipRealty, Greenhill & Co., IKT Agder, Aviva Stadium, Animal Logic, Management & Training Corporation, Brigham Young University Hawaii, School District of Chilliwack
Western Union.Aetna.DirecTV.Adventist.Equinix.Perrigo.Goodyear.HP.Cargill.Sony.Bank of the West.Prudential.
Find out what your peers are saying about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.