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

Google Cloud Security Command Center vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
3rd
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
109
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Container Security (3rd), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Compliance Management (2nd)
Google Cloud Security Comma...
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
24th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
19th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
20th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (13th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (9th), ZTNA as a Service (14th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Security Command Center is 1.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 0.7%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
Nishant_Mishra - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides visibility, address cloud misconfiguration and prevent threats
In terms of identifying, the solution is pretty good. It takes care of all the layers. We have Cloud, Kubernetes cluster, instances running, and network. We have identities, permissions, and access. It provides pictures of everything in GCP. There's no such integration required. There are Google APIs that you need to enable. The compliance reporting feature helped us maintain a baseline of compliance within the information security policies. It's pretty stable and scalable. However, visibility can be improved along with automation. SCC to provide an option to fix those things, perhaps by clicking a button. For example, if a firewall rule allows an application to accept HTTP traffic, I should be able to address that specific issue directly within the interface. It's just a regular call to action button. There are no prerequisites for the solution. It's a requirement to have good security visibility into your Google Cloud Infrastructure. Cloud Security Command Center could be a good product to consider. There are other open-source solutions available. There are solutions from Aqua that are pretty decent. I would recommend that if somebody is opting for SCC, they should also explore open-source solutions. Open-source solutions can be very beneficial, especially if they are pursuing a multi-cloud strategy. You won't need additional security tools for platforms like AWS or others. Whenever a security issue pops up, a generative AI backend provides a summary of what happened. The information provided is quite detailed. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Santiago Gomez - PeerSpot reviewer
Has improved the organization's PCI compliance with data loss prevention
I use the solution on a Macintosh computer and it has issues and does not work when I try to log in from the Safari Browser, but it works fine when I log in from the Google Chrome browser. The console has issues when the login is done through a Safari Browser. The console has to be more competitive and the compatibility of the browser needs to be better. I want to know about Skyhigh's competitiveness with other brands and about the vulnerability assessment and micro segmentations. I know Skyhigh has other products, but right now, I am studying what this new product is about. They only have English support, so I would like for them to add some Spanish support.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It gives me the information I need."
"I would rate their support a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is its advanced AI and machine learning capabilities, which allow it to identify and respond to threats in real time."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"It used to guide me about an alert. There is something called an alert guide. I used to click on the alert guide, and I could read everything. I could read about the alert and how to resolve it. I used to love that feature."
"The cloud misconfiguration feature and Offensive Security Engine, as well as their alerting process, are valuable."
"SentinelOne's behaviour analytics are valuable because they detect anomalies and malicious behaviour that signature-based solutions might miss."
"The real-time detection and response capabilities overall are great."
"Most people use the threat detection dashboard."
"It simplifies compliance efforts."
"The compliance reporting feature helped us maintain a baseline of compliance within the information security policies."
"Improves creation of security alerts on web proxy logs by having a separate system interpret said logs."
"Skyhigh performs well, and we can choose from virtual and hardware plans. We can deploy the ISO on as many virtual machines as possible and easily set up high availability on the web proxy. The location doesn't matter. The user at a site will always access the web proxy for that location. It's suitable for an organization distributed across multiple regions."
"The most valuable features of MVISION Cloud are the automatic reports and modification incidents."
"The feature I like best about Skyhigh Security is its wide range of product support. For example, my company had NetApp storage running, and Skyhigh Security has on-premises NetApp storage support, which isn't available in other solutions. Skyhigh Security also has a better filtering feature versus the filtering feature in other solutions."
"The management is very good."
"There is [a feature] called cloud registry where we can see a risk assessment for the cloud services being used. If we want to add a new cloud service or a new cloud application, we can check into it and do an assessment through the cloud registry."
"It also prevents you from writing data to your Gmail and does not allow you to move your data outside of the corporate system. That is the most important feature for me."
"The solution provides great security, higher availability, and policy granularity."
 

Cons

"There should be more documentation about the product."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"For SentinelOne, improvements could be made in managing Internet dependency as cloud-based operations can pose challenges in environments with limited connectivity."
"Customized queries should be made easier to improve PingSafe."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is an excellent CSPM tool, but its CWPP features need improvement, and there is scope for more application security posture management features."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"The AI capabilities have been heavily promoted, but I haven't seen a significant impact."
"Visibility can be improved along with automation."
"The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection."
"One thing that can be improved is their ability to integrate with other web proxies to discover unsanctioned IP apps."
"The secure gateway could be improved."
"The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Its initial setup could be more straightforward."
"Skyhigh Security is complex to manage. While it should ideally be more user-friendly, customers often find themselves having to manage it post-deployment."
"McAfee needs to add more products that could be managed from the cloud."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is costly."
"The pricing for PingSafe in India was more reasonable than other competitors."
"For pricing, it currently seems to be in line with market rates."
"Their pricing appears to be based simply on the number of accounts we have, which is common for cloud-based products."
"It's a fair price for what you get. We are happy with the price as it stands."
"The price depends on the extension of the solution that you want to buy. If you want to buy just EDR, the price is less. XDR is a little bit more expensive. There are going to be different add-ons for Singularity."
"It's not expensive. The product is in its initial growth stages and appears more competitive compared to others. It comes in different variants, and I believe the enterprise version costs around $55 per user per year. I would rate it a five, somewhere fairly moderate."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"Initially, it used to be relatively expensive, starting at around four or five hundred dollars."
"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, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations."
"The licensing fees are based on what environments you are monitoring."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable."
"Pricing is not out of reach."
"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."
"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 Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
7%
University
6%
Educational Organization
53%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
The documentation could be better. Besides improving the documentation, obtaining a professional or partner specializ...
What do you like most about Google Cloud Security Command Center?
The compliance reporting feature helped us maintain a baseline of compliance within the information security policies.
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Security Command Center?
The primary use case is to monitor the Google Cloud infrastructure across all projects for security-related alerts. T...
What do you like most about McAfee Web Gateway?
Data loss prevention and user behavior analysis are two valuable features.
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.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
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
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Western Union.Aetna.DirecTV.Adventist.Equinix.Perrigo.Goodyear.HP.Cargill.Sony.Bank of the West.Prudential.
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud Security Command Center vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.