We performed a comparison between Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Skyhigh Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Ease of Deployment: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has a straightforward setup process, while Skyhigh Security's setup can be complex and time-consuming, requiring expertise in McAfee products and cloud-based security. Prisma Cloud does not have any such prerequisites.
Features: Prisma Cloud provides a comprehensive cloud security solution that includes continuous compliance monitoring, auto-remediation, and identity-based micro-segmentation. Meanwhile, Skyhigh Security is known for its strong URL spam filtering and efficient backup features. However, it lacks SD-WAN capabilities that are available with Palo Alto's Prisma Cloud. Prisma Cloud needs to enhance its dashboard customization, automation and integration capabilities, alerting process and support, and more. On the other hand, Skyhigh Security needs to improve its virtual solution, integration, encrypted disk implementation, technical support, and more.
Pricing: Prisma Cloud's pricing is complex and based on credits, while Skyhigh Security has mixed reviews on pricing and licensing. While Prisma Cloud is generally considered expensive, it offers excellent value, and there are no hidden costs. However, additional costs for workload security protections and other features may apply. Skyhigh Security's pricing is okay but needs improvement in terms of value and ROI, and it has an annual licensing cost and expensive hardware.
Service and Support: Prisma Cloud's technical support and account managers have received some positive reviews, but slow response times have been a point of frustration for some customers. Similarly, Skyhigh Security's technical support has been helpful for some users, but others have experienced slow response times and unhelpful engineers.
ROI: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Skyhigh Security both offer benefits such as risk reduction, compliance improvement, and enhanced productivity. Prisma Cloud offers faster issue detection and increased risk clarity, while Skyhigh Security provides increased visibility and control over security posture.
Comparison Results: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is the better choice compared to Skyhigh Security. It has comprehensive and effective features, including a management console for easy visibility, continuous cloud compliance monitoring, and identity-based micro-segmentation. Skyhigh Security offers good protection overall, but lacks SD-WAN and has weak API integration and limited training resources.
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"The vulnerability management modules and the discovery and inventory are the most valuable features. Before using Wiz, it was a very manual process for both. After implementing it, we're able to get all of the analytics into a single platform that gives us visibility across all the systems in our cloud. We're able to correspond and understand what the vulnerability landscape looks like a lot faster."
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"I like Wiz's reporting, and it's easy to do queries. For example, it's pretty simple to find out how many servers we have and the applications installed on each. I like Wiz's security graph because you can use it to see the whole organization even if you have multiple accounts."
"Out of all the features, the one item that has been most valuable is the fact that Wiz puts into context all the pieces that create an issue, and applies a particular risk evaluation that helps us prioritize when we need to address a misconfiguration, vulnerability, or any issue that would put our environment into risk."
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"It supports the multi-cloud environment beautifully."
"We found it to be easy and flexible. We could easily configure it for our needs, and we could spread the Prisma Cloud platform to 16 countries without encountering any kind of problem."
"I found the network queue sets useful. I also liked the Workload Protection Module, the vulnerability findings, and how the rule sets handle the vulnerabilities based on severity."
"The ability to monitor the artifact repository is one of the most valuable features because we have a disparate set of development processes, but everything tends to land in a common set of artifact repositories. The solution gives us a single point where we can apply security control for monitoring. That's really helpful."
"Integration is very easy. And because it supports security that spans multi- and hybrid-cloud environments, it's very easy to use."
"I like Palo Alto's threat protection and Wi-Fi coverage. It has advanced features like DNS security and sandboxing. The automation capabilities are excellent."
"The most valuable features are the alerts and auto-remediation because it allows us a lot of flexibility to customize and do things the Palo Alto team never intended. We faced some challenges with certificates because we also have next-gen firewalls. We would like to equip all the traffic because there have been many cases in which the developers have done things by mistake. Deploying certificates on virtual machines can be complex in a development environment, but we managed to do that with Prisma Cloud."
"The framework to configure controls is pretty good; it's pretty sophisticated. We can implement a fair amount of testing for a fair number of controls."
"A stable solution with good support."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"Without Skyhigh, we had zero visibility, but now we are aware of so much more."
"I like the encrypted disk feature and the endpoint protection."
"The stability is the most valuable feature. We haven't had any issues with the product."
"What's most valuable in Skyhigh Security is its level of security. Another valuable feature of the solution is threat analysis."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward and easy to perform."
"It help us monitor high risk services, blocking them, and also feeding them to our egress points."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"Given the level of visibility into all the cloud environments Wiz provides, it would be nice if they could integrate some kind of mechanism to better manage tenants on multiple platforms. For example, let's say that some servers don't have an application they need, such as an antivirus. Wiz could include an API or something to push those applications out to the servers. It would be great if you could remedy these issues directly from the Wiz platform."
"We would like to see improvements to executive-level reporting and data reporting in general, which we understand is being rolled out to the platform."
"Wiz's reporting capabilities could be refined a bit. They are making headway on that, but more executive-style dashboards would be nice. They just implemented a community aspect where you can share documents and feedback. This was something users had been requesting for a while. They are listening to customer feedback and making changes."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"We're looking at some of the data compliance stuff that they've got Jon offer. I know they're looking at container security, which we gonna be looking at next."
"Sometimes, when you assign subnets to regions, the IP address will jump from one location to another because it will automatically change substantially. Then, we need to add those IP subnets to our firewall for existing access. The need to update those subnets potentially causes maintenance or access issues. So far, we can only provide bigger customers with six subnets, and a small company may not be able to access those services."
"For some custom policies, we need more features."
"We have discovered that Prisma is not functioning properly with GCP."
"One major observation is that it is not possible to implement Prisma Cloud on-premises. This is the limitation. Prisma Cloud itself is on a cloud. It is sitting on AWS and Google Cloud. It is a SaaS solution, but some of my clients have a local regulatory requirement, and they want to install it locally on their premises. That capability is not there, but government entities and ministries want to have Prisma Cloud installed locally."
"While Prisma provides a lot of visibility, it also creates a ton of work. Most customers that implement Prisma Cloud have thousands of alerts that are urgent."
"They should improve the user experience."
"Prisma Cloud supports generating CSV files, but I would also like it to generate PDF files for reporting."
"Areas like the deployment of their defenders and their central control need manual intervention. They should focus more on automation. They have a very generic case for small companies. However, for bigger companies to work, we have to do a lot of changes to our system to accommodate it. Therefore, they should change their system or deployment models so it can be easy to integrate into existing architectures."
"The Skyhigh for Google Drive interface and policy engine is a bit confusing and limited when compared against other Google Drive CASB capabilities."
"An area for improvement in Skyhigh Security is its UI. It needs to be enhanced and made more user-friendly. Right now, the UI of Skyhigh Security is sometimes confusing. For example, my company is deploying Skyhigh Security for a client and integrating it on the cloud, from an on-premises deployment to a hybrid deployment. Though the experience isn't bad, there needs to be more enhancements. Another room for improvement in Skyhigh Security is the limited training resources, especially when you compare it with Cisco, which has many study materials in the market, even free training resources. You'll get limited resources if you search for Skyhigh Security tutorials on Google and YouTube. Because of high-security requirements and the training material for Skyhigh Security not being available, most engineers and architects avoid the product because there'd be a lack of knowledge in configuring and achieving the goals you'd want to reach via the use of Skyhigh Security. The NOC team deploying the product is having difficulty getting training resources for Skyhigh Security. You'll be charged an enormous amount if you search the market for training because of the limited resources available. Skyhigh Security needs to work on marketing and awareness as an improvement to the product."
"You have to have some kind of background with cloud-based security, like working with different providers and how to make instances in the clouds and that kind of stuff - including cloud, networking cloud, cloud application development, anything like that is a requirement to be in the CASB space."
"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."
"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."
"The encrypted disk implementation could be improved. I currently use it from a dongle or USB key with two-factor authentication to access my computer."
"They could be integrated with CASB. I think normally McAfee has this solution in the cloud, but for us the best is on-premise."
"The only thing we have faced is that sometimes, randomly, the portal becomes too slow."
More Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 82 reviews while Skyhigh Security is ranked 14th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 51 reviews. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "The dashboard is very user-friendly and can be used to generate custom RQL based on user requirements". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, AWS Security Hub, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and AWS GuardDuty, whereas Skyhigh Security is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Netskope , Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Symantec Proxy and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway. See our Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs. Skyhigh Security report.
See our list of best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors and best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) 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.