Skyhigh Security Reviews

• 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.

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.

This is a web security product, it controls the usage of web for employees. There is an integral anti-virus and web URL filtering solution. I've used the solution in multiple companies that I worked in, and for the last six months I have a new company and I sell the solution along with other security products. I'm a security engineer. 

I like the anti-virus filtering, URL categorization, and reporting capabilities. I also like the ability to control what kinds of files or content can be downloaded. So you can restrict executables and potential harmful files. It's a very sophisticated and mature solution. 

I think it's a very good product although the user interface is not very intuitive and could be improved. Because of its sophistication, it's not so easy to manage and you have to learn to use it well. The solution can't really be simplified because then it would not be so customizable. You have to know what you're doing. If you don't know about filtering, you won't be able to use it well. I also think that the URL filter model and the web application filter model should be more tightly coupled but it's a lot of effort to get them to work together, not an easy problem. It's two different models - URL filtering and web application filtering. 

I've been using this solution for nine years. 

Scalability is no problem. It is cluster able so I can use many devices. We have small companies in Hungary, usually some 1000 users, but we have one simple appliance. It can deal with many users. I assume even 50,000 users would not be a problem for this product. 

I've used technical support rarely but when we've had an issue they respond relatively quickly and they know what to do. I like them. 

I have seen other products like Websense, which is Forcepoint now, and McAfee Web Gateway which is better than Websense, I think. The features are generally the same, but McAfee is easier to manage and maintain, easier to overview. It also has better debugging capabilities and better logging.

The initial setup is very, very straightforward. I think it's one of the best. 

I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it a 10 out of 10. 

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.

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.

We primarily use the solution for security purposes. McAfee in general is very good for that.

The solution is stable. The performance has been great.

It's an easy-to-use product. We find it to be quite user-friendly.

The scalability of the product is excellent. 

Overall, we have been very happy with the product. It's been working well.

The installation was straightforward and pretty simple. 

The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable. 

I"ve been using the solution only for a couple of months at this point. It hasn't been a long period of time just yet. It's still new to me.

The product is quite stable and we have found the performance to be good. It doesn't crash or freeze. there are no bugs or glitches. We are happy with its capabilities.

The solution can scale if you need it to. A company shouldn't have any issues expanding it.

We have one or two customers that use it at this time.

We've been satisfied with technical support overall. They have been helpful and responsive. We have no complaints in terms of their overall capabilities.

The initial setup was not overly complex or difficult. It was straightforward. We found it simple. A company shouldn't face any issues with the implementation.

The solution could improve the cost a bit.

You do need to have a license in order to use the solution. I cannot speak to the exact costs.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten overall. We are pretty happy with its capabilities and have no complaints. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

• 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.