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

"I would say iboss is a very good product; its scalability is very good, and it's seamless for the user."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"Consolidating management into iboss's single pane of glass has helped my organization reduce operational costs by around twenty to twenty-five percent."
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"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."
"We are not aware of a single compromise from the web since implementing the solution."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"This is a stable solution, constantly running across the entire enterprise."
"The most valuable feature is the support; it's the best, with a really good strategy and an excellent CASB solution."
"We use this solution for controlling web content that the users are accessing, and you can control your employees when they are in the office and out of the office, without using a VPN in the same fashion."
"User analytics."
"The solution significantly helps in enhancing security management."
"Box API features with DLP capabilities."
"It is easy to configure rules."
"In that way, it gives in-depth visibility and a granular monitoring facility for the company: What is happening inside the company, what people are using, what kind of data is going through the company."
 

Cons

"I think iboss could be improved by making reporting and dashboard customization more flexible, and simplifying troubleshooting policy issues."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"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."
"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."
"Its pricing could be better."
"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."
"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."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"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."
"Improve the user interface (UI) of the tool and make it user-friendly."
"Skyhigh Security, as a product, is excellent, but in terms of the right services and support, those are lagging very much, for example, in Trellix. From one hundred, its score has gone down to ten, so ten out of one hundred, otherwise, it's the number one product."
"I chose seven out of ten because Skyhigh Security has some problems with frequent updates on the SCP client, and there are some bugs."
"De-tokenization."
"I think that the User Interface could be improved."
"Its capabilities are still rather limited compared to other solutions."
"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."
"The feature that we would like to have is a hybrid environment, including both cloud and on-premises."
 

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 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."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"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."
"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."
"This is an expensive product, although it is made for larger enterprises and not for small organizations."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The solution is quite expensive. As we take add-ons continuously as per our customer's requirements, there are additional charges."
"Have a risk-based approach towards pricing."
"The solution's hardware is expensive."
"They definitely charge a huge amount. All the security service providers charge a huge amount."
"There is an annual licensing cost to use McAfee Web Gateway. The purchasing of licensing can be difficult for the government sector."
"Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
906,960 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Construction Company
9%
Retailer
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
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 Business10
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise10
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.
906,960 professionals have used our research since 2012.