Menlo Secure vs Skyhigh Security comparison

Menlo Security and Skyhigh Security are both solutions in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category. Menlo Security is ranked #26, while Skyhigh Security is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.8. Menlo Security holds a 2.2% mindshare in WSG, compared to Skyhigh Security’s 3.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Menlo Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Skyhigh Security users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

Skyhigh Security and Menlo Secure are contenders in the cybersecurity market. Menlo Secure is superior in features, while Skyhigh Security stands out for customer support and lower setup costs.

Features: Skyhigh Security provides robust cloud security, focusing on data loss prevention and threat intelligence. It effectively uses shadow IT capabilities for enhanced visibility and risk management. The solution supports comprehensive threat analysis and integrates seamlessly with various services. Menlo Secure distinguishes itself with advanced isolation technology for internet and email security, ensuring unmatched protection against web-based threats. It offers seamless web browsing with effective phishing site isolation and detailed user activity reports through a single console.

Room for Improvement: Skyhigh Security could enhance real-time threat intelligence and the flexibility of web proxy configurations for seamless integration across platforms. Improved reporting tools and user experience can fortify user analytics. Menlo Secure could optimize the logging process for easier tracking of user activities and current users. An expanded feature set for logging and authentication management would be valuable, along with covering a broader range of security threats without bypassing isolation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Skyhigh Security is known for its streamlined deployment process and excellent customer support, offering smooth onboarding and ongoing assistance. Menlo Secure offers a straightforward deployment model but lacks in delivering the same level of customer service satisfaction, focusing primarily on simplicity and efficiency in its integration.

Pricing and ROI: Skyhigh Security offers competitive pricing, which provides a favorable ROI due to efficient security offerings and cost-effective solutions. Although Menlo Secure has a higher setup cost, its innovative features justify the investment over time, especially for organizations prioritizing advanced online protection.

To learn more, read our detailed Menlo Secure vs. Skyhigh Security Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure vs. Skyhigh Security

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 896,510 peers since 2012

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

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.3%, 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 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
iboss	3.3%
Skyhigh Security	3.2%
Menlo Secure	2.2%
Other	91.3%

Secure Web Gateways (SWG)

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula

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.

Read full review

reviewer2701794

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.

Read full review

Felipe Antoniazzi

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The iboss solution gives me the ability to scan the traffic through all the ports, through all the 131,000 PCP and UDP ports, and with this ability, we have the granularity also for consults over social media and applications on mobile, and this is an advantage that the customers are looking for right now."

"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."

"The solution has massively improved our security posture, giving us full visibility into what our staff does online."

"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."

"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"

"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."

"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."

"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."

More iboss pros

"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."

"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."

"We are not aware of a single compromise from the web since implementing the solution."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"The solution is invisible to our end users, so it doesn't have any impact on their work or performance."

More Menlo Secure pros

"Skyhigh has given us categorization and rating of websites separate from what the web proxy places on the logs."

"The other products that I have evaluated do not have the scalability options that McAfee has."

"Offers a very strong URL spam filtering feature."

"We are able to see what cloud services are being used with more clarity than with our proxies."

"The cloud security features are the most valuable."

"Skyhigh offers solutions like WLP and CASB. These tools provide instructions and guidelines for enhancing data security. Additionally, they offer additional software solutions for further protection."

"The solution is very easy to use, easy to navigate, very stable, scalable, quite flexible, and overall the performance is good."

"I found the solution to be stable."

More Skyhigh Security pros

Cons

"The dashboards for local use could be better."

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."

"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."

"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."

"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."

"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, and that is where in 2025 we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform."

"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."

"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."

More iboss cons

"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

More Menlo Secure cons

"I would like to see more power being given to the admin. In the sense that in case an employee is facing an issue and they want to configure a service, like attaching an email in Gmail, for example, they should be given the option to make the service request and get that configured on the go."

"The Skyhigh for Google Drive interface and policy engine is a bit confusing and limited when compared against other Google Drive CASB capabilities."

"It has many gaps, so I think some customers take three months and up to six months for the deployment of Skyhigh Security, and after the deployment, they use it for years."

"I think the technical support from Skyhigh Security needs room for improvement; I would give it a six out of 10."

"De-tokenization."

"Sometimes the console performance is slow and updating custom attributes can be cumbersome as you have to do each attribute for a cloud service individually, then click the popup box to continue."

"The performance of the tool can be improved to provide faster report generation."

"The solution is hard to configure, our team does not have specific training requirements for McAfee making it difficult."

More Skyhigh Security cons

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 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 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 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."

"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."

"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 an annual licensing cost to use McAfee Web Gateway. The purchasing of licensing can be difficult for the government sector."

"This is an expensive product, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations."

"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually. The price is reasonable."

"The solution's hardware is expensive."

"Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost."

"This is an expensive product, but you have to compare that with other solutions that are on the market."

"The tool is not expensive."

"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."

More Skyhigh Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

896,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

14%

Retailer

10%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

13%

Government

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	8

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	32
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	45

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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....

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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. ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs iboss

Compared 10% of the time

Netskope vs iboss

Compared 9% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs iboss

Compared 8% of the time

FortiSASE vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

Cisco Umbrella vs iboss

Compared 6% of the time

More iboss Competitors

Prisma Access Browser vs Menlo Secure

Compared 19% of the time

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Menlo Secure

Compared 14% of the time

Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs Menlo Secure

Compared 9% of the time

Cloudflare One vs Menlo Secure

Compared 8% of the time

Cisco Web Security Appliance vs Menlo Secure

Compared 3% of the time

More Menlo Secure Competitors

Netskope vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 7% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 6% of the time

Forcepoint ONE vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 5% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 5% of the time

Blue Coat Secure Web Gateway Virtual Appliance vs Skyhigh Security

Compared 2% of the time

More Skyhigh Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

iboss

May 2026

Download iboss product report

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure

May 2026

Download Menlo Secure product report

Buyer's Guide

Skyhigh Security

May 2026

Download Skyhigh Security product report

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

iboss

Demo not available

Menlo Security

Skyhigh Security

Overview

Iboss offers a comprehensive cloud-based security platform valued for its scalability and autonomous features, ensuring robust security with easy deployment and management capabilities.

Renowned for its robust security architecture, Iboss integrates seamlessly within diverse networks, delivering efficient granular filtering and advanced content categorization. Its single pane of glass console provides ease of management, allowing rapid scalability suitable for rapidly deploying environments. Operates in BYOD setups due to inline filtering without device installation. Integration with cloud-based applications enhances user control, and features like SASE, SSL inspection, and ChatGPT risk protection stand as highlights. Despite its strengths, users have pointed out areas for enhancement like direct navigation in reports, SSL decryption, and better cloud integration while having room to improve data loss prevention.

What are the most important features of Iboss?

Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across diverse networks.
SASE: A consolidated approach to secure access.
SSL Inspection: Ensures safe data transmission.
Granular Filtering: Detailed control over accessible content.
Single Pane Management: Unifies control through a centralized console.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Cost-effectiveness: Offers competitive pricing with robust features.
Autonomous Operation: Reduces management overhead.
Responsive Support: Provides assistance when needed.
Flexible Deployment: Available for both cloud and on-premises environments.

The usage of Iboss spans educational institutions, specifically K-12, to enforce internet policies, protect data, and support remote work environments. It provides web filtering and security frameworks to ensure safe browsing. Its platform-as-a-service model offers flexibility for both cloud-based and on-premises requirements, integrating seamlessly to deliver enhanced security features suitable for various deployment needs including zero trust, CASB, and network security for work-from-home setups.

iboss

Menlo Security Secure Application Access

Menlo Security Secure Application Access makes zero trust access easy, giving users secure connectivity to private applications, including web and legacy applications. At the core of Secure Application Access is the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser, which fetches, secures and delivers the content for users.

In addition to providing simple-to-deploy, clientless ZTA, Secure Application Access and the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser protect applications from attacks such as session hijacking, cookie manipulation, and other tactics that employ protocol manipulation.

Secure Application Access protects applications from Internet threats and provides granular controls for added protection of the application and associated data. These security controls include Read-only/Read-write, Upload/download, Copy/paste, AV scanning, Sandboxing, and Data Loss Prevention.

Last Mile Data Protection

Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection identifies and prevents sensitive data from leaving your company by meticulously inspecting all file uploads and user input across browsing sessions. Leveraging the Secure Cloud Browser, users are protected from the internet and you can protect your organization from data loss with comprehensive traffic monitoring and controls. This approach addresses the growing concerns surrounding data leakage in the age of AI tools like ChatGPT.

By identifying sensitive data through file types, regular expressions, or predefined libraries, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection empowers security teams to regulate data input into AI platforms and prevent unauthorized uploads. This capability provides crucial protection for intellectual property, PII, and other confidential information.

The solution leverages the Menlo Cloud Security Platform's visibility and control over traffic to reliably detect and prevent data leaks originating from both browser submission forms and non-browser traffic. With the ability to inspect encrypted web traffic, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection enforces DLP policies consistently across all users and devices, ensuring comprehensive data protection.

Menlo Security

Skyhigh Security provides comprehensive protection with features like user behavior analytics, shadow IT identification, and data loss prevention. Its integration with IT infrastructure offers robust security insights and helps maintain compliance.

Skyhigh Security offers a user-friendly interface that simplifies navigation while delivering substantial threat protection. It enhances existing IT infrastructure integration, such as DLP and Active Directory, to strengthen security. Yet, there is room for improvement in report generation speed, interface intuitiveness, and integration with other products. Organizations utilize Skyhigh Security to audit internet behavior, secure cloud environments and control web content. It effectively manages data movement and ensures compliance, while preventing unauthorized access and bandwidth misuse.

What are the key features of Skyhigh Security?

Shadow IT Identification: Detects unauthorized IT activity to maintain security.
Cloud Service Risk Assessments: Offers detailed evaluations of cloud services' risks.
Data Loss Prevention: Protects against accidental or deliberate data breaches.
User Behavior Analytics: Analyzes user actions for potential security threats.
Security Insights: Provides comprehensive reports to understand security posture.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Threat Protection: Offers robust measures against potential security risks.
Compliance: Assists with industry regulations and standards adherence.
Integration Capabilities: Enhances protection by integrating with existing infrastructure.
User Experience: Easy navigation despite needing interface improvements.
Cloud Security: Secures cloud environments effectively.

In sectors like finance, healthcare, and technology, companies implement Skyhigh Security for its comprehensive monitoring capabilities. It helps secure access to SaaS applications and protects against threats, ensuring adherence to regulatory requirements and preventing data breaches while optimizing performance in cloud environments.

Skyhigh Security

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.

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure vs. Skyhigh Security

April 2026

Free Report: Menlo Secure vs. Skyhigh Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Menlo Secure vs. Skyhigh Security and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

896,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Menlo Secure vs. Skyhigh Security report.

See our list of best Secure Web Gateways (SWG) vendors.

We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.