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
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
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

"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."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"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."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"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."
"Consolidating management into iboss's single pane of glass has helped my organization reduce operational costs by around twenty to twenty-five percent."
"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."
"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is invisible to our end users, so it doesn't have any impact on their work or performance."
"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 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."
"We are able to see what cloud services are being used with more clarity than with our proxies."
"In terms of their compatibility with major cloud providers, in terms of their abilities, capabilities, and features, they exceed everyone's capabilities in the CASB market."
"Overall, we have been extremely satisfied with this solution."
"Data loss prevention and user behavior analysis are two valuable features."
"Skyhigh for Shadow IT provides us visibility into the Shadow IT, helps us in blocking high risk services, and also in containing the data exfiltration to these high risk services."
"Skyhigh networks is the most mature and feature-rich product and integrates with your current infrastructure, rather than adding another agent or needing to send all traffic through a proxy, which simplifies setup and ensures the product does not cause bottlenecks while adding value to your already existing security infrastructure."
"In my opinion, the best feature Skyhigh Security offers is the DLP capabilities and visibility into cloud."
"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."
 

Cons

"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."
"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."
"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."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."
"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."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists."
"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."
"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."
"The initial setup was challenging, and the documentation could be improved to make it easier."
"Improve the user interface (UI) of the tool and make it user-friendly."
"One major challenge is that downloading incidents during the investigation process takes a very long time, and this issue should be resolved."
"The virtual solution requires improvement."
"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."
"I think it's a very good product although the user interface is not very intuitive and could be improved."
"Troubleshooting takes more time and is not easy; direct support is challenging."
"One thing that can be improved is their ability to integrate with other web proxies to discover unsanctioned IP apps."
 

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 expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"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."
"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."
"This is an expensive product, but you have to compare that with other solutions that are on the market."
"The price of the solution is good and we pay an annual license."
"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 licensing fees are based on what environments you are monitoring."
"The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations."
"Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
905,601 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%
Financial Services Firm
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 Business8
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?
From my perspective as a distributor and based on feedback from my clients, Skyhigh Security has a bit of a disadvant...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Web Gateway?
I do not use Skyhigh Security firsthand, but M.Tech Philippines distributes Skyhigh Security as one of the authorized...
What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Web Gateway?
I always believe that Skyhigh Security works hand-in-hand with Trellix. What we are doing in our approach is to deliv...
 

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.
905,601 professionals have used our research since 2012.