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)
6th
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) (6th), ZTNA as a Service (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
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 (52nd), ZTNA (25th), Cloud Security Remediation (9th)
Skyhigh Security
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
72
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (13th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), ZTNA as a Service (10th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.5%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 2.2%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skyhigh Security is 3.3%, 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 (%)
iboss3.5%
Skyhigh Security3.3%
Menlo Secure2.2%
Other91.0%
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.
DG
Deputy Manager at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Centralized cloud security has improved DLP incident management and simplifies email protection
One major challenge is that downloading incidents during the investigation process takes a very long time, and this issue should be resolved. More customized columns and filtering options in incident review would be beneficial. File types should be included, such as file names along with file extensions, which are not currently available to my knowledge. Overall, Skyhigh Security is very good and just needs to improve in terms of the latency of downloading incidents.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."
"As I mentioned, the return on investment is significant, as it saved our office locations' bandwidth because when you are working remotely at home, your internet traffic routes directly to iboss and will not go to your office building, saving bandwidth bottlenecks and ensuring that issues with our building internet circuits will not impact your internet connectivity because you are directly going to the iboss data center."
"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."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."
"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."
"It is easy to configure rules."
"It makes our work easier."
"The threat protection capabilities are very strong."
"Although it is costly, I would recommend this solution to anyone."
"Skyhigh has given us categorization and rating of websites separate from what the web proxy places on the logs."
"Skyhigh Security has positively impacted my organization by helping fill a need that was unaddressed at the time, especially as Cloud Access Security Brokers came out and were very popular around 2018."
"In my opinion, the best feature Skyhigh Security offers is the DLP capabilities and visibility into cloud."
"What I found most valuable in Skyhigh Security is its stability. The solution also has good KB articles that make it simple for users to do the deployment of Skyhigh Security themselves, without the need for integrators."
 

Cons

"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"iboss can be improved because the integration could be better; you need to import all the sites that you access today, and there are a few problems whenever you import thousands of websites, making the integration process messy for the users."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"I have heard they are doing DDoS filtering, but I am not certain if they are implementing it correctly."
"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."
"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."
"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Support for securing more cloud apps."
"Skyhigh Security can be improved because their administrative dashboard frequently has issues; it is unresponsive, unusable, or very slow often."
"The virtual solution requires improvement."
"Skyhigh Security is complex to manage. While it should ideally be more user-friendly, customers often find themselves having to manage it post-deployment."
"One major challenge is that downloading incidents during the investigation process takes a very long time, and this issue should be resolved."
"The encrypted disk implementation could be improved."
"Iron out the few bugs that I've seen."
"The solution is hard to configure, our team does not have specific training requirements for McAfee making it difficult."
 

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."
"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."
"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."
"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 solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."
"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 tool is not expensive."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The solution's hardware is expensive."
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"This is an expensive product, but you have to compare that with other solutions that are on the market."
"Have a risk-based approach towards pricing."
"Pricing is not out of reach."
"The licensing fees are based on what environments you are monitoring."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
904,054 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%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise9
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business34
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise49
 

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.
904,054 professionals have used our research since 2012.