No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Menlo Secure vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (8th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Menlo Secure
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
26th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (51st), ZTNA (24th), Cloud Security Remediation (9th)
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
70
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (13th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (9th), ZTNA as a Service (10th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.4%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 2.2%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 3.2%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
iboss3.4%
Skyhigh Security3.2%
Menlo Secure2.2%
Other91.2%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.
reviewer2701794 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Bluechip Enterprise at a manufacturing company with 51-200 employees
Provides strong protection and multiple use cases but struggles with market recognition
There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto. Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco. What can be improved is market awareness and adoption of the technology. When selling it in the channel, regardless of how good the technology might be, success depends more on market adoption and awareness.
Felipe Antoniazzi - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Lead at Johnson and Johnson
Centralized cloud visibility has strengthened governance but still needs smoother policy tuning
Skyhigh Security is, in my view, a strong platform. Of course, there are still areas where the user experience and operational workflows could be improved. One area for improvement is simplifying the initial deployment and policy tuning process. In large enterprise environments, configuring CASB and DLP policies across multiple SaaS platforms can become complex and time-consuming, especially when trying to balance security controls with user productivity. Another improvement in my view is related to the platform improving dashboard usability and investigation workflows. While the amount of data and visibility is valuable, some reporting and navigation areas can feel less intuitive than newer cloud-native security platforms. Another improvement opportunity, in my view, is alert tuning and noise reduction. Many security monitoring solutions require achieving the right balance between visibility and excessive alerting through continuous optimization. More intelligent prioritization and contextual risk scoring could help reduce analyst fatigue.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"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."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"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."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"Either you have access to something or don't have access to it, and if you do, we can ensure, 100 percent of the time, that there is nothing malicious that is going to impact our system in any way."
"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."
"We have definitely seen ROI, as we save a ton of money and time because the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools prior to implementing them had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged."
"We are not aware of a single compromise from the web since implementing the solution."
"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."
"The solution is invisible to our end users, so it doesn't have any impact on their work or performance."
"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."
"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."
"The most valuable feature is the support; it's the best, with a really good strategy and an excellent CASB solution."
"Shadow IT Sanctioned IT."
"The best features Skyhigh Security offers, in my view, include centralized cloud visibility combined with strong data protection controls."
"Provides quite a bit of visibility into cloud services being utilized in our environment."
"The most valuable features of MVISION Cloud are the automatic reports and modification incidents."
"The stability is the most valuable feature; we haven't had any issues with the product and it's easy to configure and manage day to day."
"The solution provides great security, higher availability, and policy granularity."
"Improves creation of security alerts on web proxy logs by having a separate system interpret said logs."
 

Cons

"I have heard they are doing DDoS filtering, but I am not certain if they are implementing it correctly."
"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."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"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."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"One thing I would like to see differently with their Zero Trust platform is that some of the AI aspects related to high-risk activities have more false positives."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco."
"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."
"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists."
"I would like to see more power being given to the admin."
"Skyhigh Security can be improved, and the biggest problem they have is that they are still owned by private equity, which is a massive drain on them financially because of the debt burden that they share with their sister company, Trellix."
"Troubleshooting takes more time and is not easy; direct support is challenging."
"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."
"The customer service is five out of 10."
"Customer Service: A six out of 10. Technical Support: A six out of 10."
"The Skyhigh for Google Drive interface and policy engine is a bit confusing and limited when compared against other Google Drive CASB capabilities."
"The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"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."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"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."
"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."
"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."
"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable."
"The tool is not expensive."
"Some of our clients have a perpetual license and pay additional support yearly."
"Pricing is not out of reach."
"There is an annual licensing cost to use McAfee Web Gateway. The purchasing of licensing can be difficult for the government sector."
"Pricing for Skyhigh Security is okay, though there's always a scope for price improvements. Its pricing is okay compared to other products because other products have very expensive licensing costs. Along with the licensing, support is also provided for Skyhigh Security, so pricing is reasonable, but if there's proactive or better support, that will justify the pricing. I haven't interacted with the Skyhigh Security technical support team yet, so I'd give pricing a four out of five rating for now."
"The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations."
"Pricing for Skyhigh Security is fine."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
900,228 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Construction Company
9%
Retailer
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise8
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise47
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...
What needs improvement with Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto....
What is your primary use case for Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
People are mainly using it for zero trust web access. Menlo Secure is built from the ground up to provide zero basic ...
What advice do you have for others considering Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
Secure file sharing and data protection is not exactly what Menlo Secure is designed to do. While it can handle some ...
What needs improvement with McAfee Web Gateway?
Skyhigh Security is, in my view, a strong platform. Of course, there are still areas where the user experience and op...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Web Gateway?
My main use case for Skyhigh Security is primarily for CASB functionality, SaaS security visibility, cloud data prote...
What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Web Gateway?
My main advice would be to spend enough time planning governance, policy design, and operational workflows before ena...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security
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.
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 Menlo Secure vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,228 professionals have used our research since 2012.