Skyhigh Security Reviews

The user analytics.

We were able to analyse our user activity, which helped us to identify the associated risks.

Improve the user interface (UI) of the tool and make it user-friendly.

Three years.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

A six out of 10.

A seven out of 10.

No.

I was not part of the setup.

A vendor team did the implementation. I would give them a seven out of 10 on their expertise.

I have no idea of what it is.

No.

I like the encrypted disk feature and the endpoint protection.

The encrypted disk implementation could be improved. I currently use it from a dongle or USB key with two-factor authentication to access my computer.

I've been using MVISION Cloud for seven months.

It is a very stable solution.

We've had problems with scalability. We have 2000 users.

Technical support has been fast.

The initial setup was very complex from a rules point of view. There were problems with integration to the cloud and connecting to EIM solutions.

There are three other good products: Carbon Black, CrowdStrike, and SentinelOne. I think Carbon Black is the best, and I would rate MVISION Cloud at nine on a scale from one to ten.

We use it to discover, protect, and permit.

Skyhigh for Shadow IT provides us visibility into the Shadow IT. It helps us in blocking high risk services and also in containing the data exfiltration to these high risk services.

It help us monitor high risk services, blocking them, and also feeding them to our egress points.

The risk management feature.

Integration with other technology ecosystems.

Initially, there were stability issues, but now it is perfect.

No scalability issues.

The support team is very good.

We did not previously use a different solution.

The initial setup was okay.

The implementation team was proficient.

Have a risk-based approach towards pricing.

There were none to evaluate at that time.

It is an innovative, dynamic tool.

• Tokenization
• User analytics

• Identification of user activity
• Login information

De-tokenization.

More than one year.

Not for now.

No.

No.

Good.

Good.

No.

Straightforward.

We used a vendor team.

I do not know.

It is affordable. Skyhigh has some good features.

No.

• Box API features with DLP capabilities
• Shadow IT

Our organization is moving much of its non-sensitive data to Box. We needed the ability to have full visibility into what was occurring within the Box infrastructure, from Skyhigh to Box API integration.

SkyHigh has the ability to place users or groups on a ‘Watchlist’; which allows you to see certain views with these Watchlists users/groups in them. This is great when you are looking at live data but if I wanted to generate a report on "only" the watchlists.

Two and a half years.

No.

Skyhigh has been improving their product and releasing upgrades on a consistent basis. Now, the stability and speed are greatly improved. Looking forward to their next major release.

No, since I am able to use my blue coat logs.

A 10 out of 10

A nine out of 10.

No.

Straightforward. Guidelines and instructions are very easy to follow.

Our implementation was in-house. Since the deployment of this cloud access security broker (CASB) was rather simple, there was no need to bring in a third-party vendor.

The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations. We currently only use the Box API, but we thought about using the Salesforce one. However, it was drastically more expensive per user. We are starting to look at the 365 monitoring since we may migrate there soon, but I have not looked at the pricing for it yet.

No.

We use it to block malicious IP addresses and check for security leaks. 

It is easy to configure rules.

It is an expensive solution.

I have three years of experience with this solution.

Technical support was very good.

The initial setup was easy and took about two weeks.

It's an expensive solution.

It's the perfect tool for investigation of malicious IPs, and I rate it at ten on a scale from one to ten.

Skyhigh's shadow IT capability and cloud risk registry are the two most helpful tools for our organization.

We are able to see what cloud services are being used with much more clarity than with our proxies and more importantly identify that we are using many cloud services we were not aware were even cloud services. Especially collaboration services. The cloud risk registry has been great for getting a quick and clearer understanding of the risk of proposed services that we are looking at allowing. Previously we were paying for expensive industry reports.

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

We deployed the FedRAMP GovCloud version, which was not quite up to date with the mainstream version and still had some bugs to work out. Some other features are still in the works. We also found that it is important to ensure your inputs to the system are all uniform as it would have made for a more rapid deployment.

Excellent.

Excellent.

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

The vendor team was excellent.

User analytics.

The user activity identification improved.

The services take some time to load. It would be helpful if the loading time was reduced.

I have been using it for the past few months.

No issues.

No issues.

No issues.

I have not used the support as of now.

No.

I was not a part of the initial setup.