My main use cases for Skyhigh Security were securing internet access for people working remotely before the COVID pandemic, and helping prevent data loss through people uploading files and sensitive information to web-based services and online storage drives.

A specific example of a scenario where I used Skyhigh Security for one of these use cases is when the agent was installed on all of our laptops. This meant that even when we were working from home and not on the VPN, whenever we were browsing the web, all of the content that we were seeing and all of the URLs we were trying to visit were going through the cloud instances of the Skyhigh Security scanners to ensure we did not go to prohibited websites and that there were no malicious files downloaded to our laptops.

Skyhigh Security worked reasonably well, I very rarely had issues, and their uptime was good enough that we did not experience any outages.

The best features that Skyhigh Security offers are their newer Zero Trust access so that you do not need VPNs and you can access your files from anywhere without having to go through a lot of configuration by the end user.

The Zero Trust feature specifically helped my team or organization before we thought about putting sensitive information onto SharePoint in the cloud, so we wanted all of the sensitive information on-premise. By going through their Zero Trust interface, we effectively had single sign-on to the internal network remotely without a VPN, so it reduced the overhead and gave us faster access to the files.

Skyhigh Security positively impacted my organization by allowing us to get rid of the VPNs, which reduced the overhead for IT, and it meant we did not need as many licenses for the VPN software for all of the laptops. With the vast majority working remotely, this was a significant cost saving.

Skyhigh Security can be improved, and the biggest problem they have is that they are still owned by private equity, which is a massive drain on them financially because of the debt burden that they share with their sister company, Trellix. They need to somehow get out from under that private equity or get a better investment model so that they do not keep losing experienced staff without being able to replace them.

Most of what I have heard is related to the business side, and from the feedback I have received from people I know that still work there, when they are allowed to focus on delivery, they are still able to deliver. However, the lack of staffing is slowing down their ability to innovate and push features out that customers may want.

I have used Skyhigh Security for an extended period.

Skyhigh Security is stable; they do have scheduled downtimes, as most offerings do, but they have multi-tenancy and multi-locations. If your primary location is down, you just get diverted to the other one. Around 14 years ago, there were problems with stability on Skyhigh Security products when they were part of McAfee and Intel, but they addressed those problems by about 2014, so since then, everything has been good.

Skyhigh Security's scalability is good, as their cloud auto-scales. They have peering agreements with a lot of the major ISPs where their data centers are, which allows them to get a really good bandwidth allocation. Because they dynamically scale, I did not experience them becoming overloaded and causing lag.

Customer support has been at times mixed; however, I think it has improved. They had a reasonable amount of staff turnover as a result of all of the structural changes that the company went through. Last I heard, it is a lot better than it was, and they have some really technical people in there. If there is a complex problem that needs to be worked through, when it reaches the right people, they are very good and able to get through it. There is also some really good diagnostic information built into their web gateways that they deploy on-premise if you want to do hybrid, so they get a lot of information before you even know something might be wrong.

Skyhigh Security was the one we used and we did not previously use a different solution.

Before choosing Skyhigh Security, we did not evaluate other options because we were a sister company, so we had no choice.

Skyhigh Security is deployed in my organization in a hybrid cloud setup.

My company does not have a business relationship with Skyhigh Security other than being a customer; we were a sister company, both owned by the same private equity.

I have seen a return on investment, and while I cannot share specific metrics, there are fewer gateways needed to be deployed on-premise. I suspect we would have lost one or two heads in our IT support team or IT deployment team, though I do not know for definite. I do know that by moving to having more in the cloud, their cloud is automatically updated as part of a SaaS solution, which reduces the responsibility on the company to do the updates themselves. Their support system worked reasonably well, and because there were not many problems with their agent on the laptops, we did not need a great deal internally to manage that.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it was not too bad. I do not know the figures, but it was not as painful as it could have been, and I think it was reasonable. I was not involved in the negotiations because they can always be painful.

Skyhigh Security deserves an eight out of ten rating because they are one of the better companies in the web security business that are focused primarily on hosting in the cloud rather than putting a lot of infrastructure onto a client's site. They are getting decent reviews within the standard competitive analysis areas; however, they cannot implement at the rate they need to, which is what brings them down to an eight.

Skyhigh Security can be improved, and the biggest problem they have is that they are still owned by private equity, which is a massive drain on them financially because of the debt burden that they share with their sister company, Trellix. They need to somehow get out from under that private equity or get a better investment model so that they do not keep losing experienced staff without being able to replace them.

Most of what I have heard is related to the business side, and from the feedback I have received from people I know that still work there, when they are allowed to focus on delivery, they are still able to deliver. However, the lack of staffing is slowing down their ability to innovate and push features out that customers may want.

My advice to others looking into using Skyhigh Security is to seriously consider it because they have some really good features and excellent data residency options. You can choose which location you want your filtering to be done in if you are using their cloud solution, which means if you are in Europe, you can choose to use the European data centers rather than the US ones. This provides reduced latency, and your data remains inside the EU, making it a really valuable feature. I believe they are competitive feature-wise with all the others in the market.

I am currently working on Cisco Email Security Gateway, ESA, and I am also exploring Trellix Skyhigh proxy. I have been working with Skyhigh Security for the last six to seven months. My customer is using the solution, and we are supporting the client location as well. They have a vendor in the Bangalore area of southern India from which they procured on-premises servers.

In security posture, we have integrated Skyhigh Security with IBM QRadar, which is quite helpful to know how the activities are going. If any critical or security events occur in Skyhigh Security, we are able to get those to our IBM QRadar, making it very much easier to monitor all the security events in our environment. This is a major use case compared to other tools, as Skyhigh Security is the most useful for our security posture.

We have nearly 900 plus branches here, where we have rerouted our traffic through proxy like Trellix Skyhigh Security. We operate in a major financial sector in India, and that is why we use Skyhigh Security to reroute all our traffic via proxy for our security. Only then will it reach our gateway. We monitor all the URLs and the plant IPs in our proxy.

We are tracing those IPs to see whether they have a valid code or not. We also check with Trellix Sandbox to determine whether the URL is malicious or not. Additionally, we have included our Cisco Umbrella with our proxy, so the DNS resolution happens on our Umbrella side. We continuously monitor the traffic on our proxy side.

The threat protection feature is a major useful thing because for our 900 branches we monitor with this proxy only. If any issue or any URL does not reach, it is quite helpful to check whether the issue is in the proxy side or in the actual end-user side. It is quite easy to monitor. We do not get all those things from the firewall end, and it is quite easy to gather that information from the proxy, which is a major benefit here. It also majorly helps to hide our actual IPs, as we have directed all the IPs from the proxy, making it very helpful to hide our internal servers.

When compared to other technologies, Skyhigh Security is quite simple, but if there is any improvement in the GUI, it will be quite easy for us because it looks a legacy interface. This is the major thing; if there is any improvement on the GUI side, it will be more helpful.

We do not have a DLP in Trellix on our side, as we are using Windows.

I have been working with Skyhigh Security for the last six to seven months.

We did not face any downtime on that site, so it is quite reliable. We also have internet clustering in that area, so there is no significant downtime. There is no downtime in the proxy side, which is a major benefit here. If any box faces any issue, it is clustered, so there is no issue on that side.

Scalability is very good, and I can give a rating up to nine out of ten for scalability.

Till now there is no issue in the proxy side or in customer support. We are quite satisfied with that product.

In Trellix trial portal, we have raised cases for any escalations or issues. With that, we can know the case severity such as P1, P2, or P3, allowing easy interaction from the customer support side. It is much easier compared to other support portals.

Recently we have just migrated our servers to new on-premises servers with the latest version. For deployment, we have worked with our deployment team who provided good support from Trellix team as well. It was not disruptive at that time; we went live within two to three days without any disturbance in that area, making it much quicker compared to other tools. Migration is easier, and deployment is quite straightforward.

For IAM, we are using other tools, as we are a financial institution, so we do not go with a single vendor platform. We need to work with multiple vendors for guidelines provided by our government.

For an enterprise customer, Skyhigh Security is quite good for them to use. I think it is not fit for small and medium-sized enterprises, but for enterprise customers, it is much more cost-efficient and also very secure for that environment. I would rate this review overall as ten out of ten.

The typical use case for our clients is cloud security.

The cloud security features are the most valuable. The solution significantly helps in enhancing security management. It also contributes to operational cost savings.

The solution has room for improvement in its DDoS protection. Additionally, the documentation needs enhancement to provide easier setup for users.

I have used the solution for two years.

I rate the stability as seven out of ten.

I rate the scalability as eight out of ten.

The initial setup was challenging, and the documentation could be improved to make it easier.

I would recommend Skyhigh Security to others. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We have better data protection after implementing the product.

The product enables us to scan files for viruses and vulnerabilities. The threat protection capabilities are very strong. The product handles our compliance and governance challenges well. It enhances our security.

It is difficult for non-technical people to learn the tool. There are no training videos available for the product.

I have been using the solution for about five years.

We used Cisco IronPort before. It was very expensive, so we switched to Skyhigh.

The implementation is very easy.

The tool is not expensive. The cost is comparable to other products in the market. The licensing model is perfect.

I have also used Cisco Firepower.

I am a reseller. The solution does not have an AI mechanism, but it is connected to an SIEM system. The SIEM system has AI, and Skyhigh transports the events to the SIEM system. We are planning to stay with Skyhigh Security. We have integrated the solution with our existing infrastructure.

I will recommend the tool to others. The tool has all the features I need. It is very popular in our country. Many companies and government organizations use it. Bigger companies use the solution more. Small companies in our country do not use security products. The solution’s website provides documentation. I learned the tool myself.

Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to provide security to remote users.

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.

Skyhigh Security is complex to manage. While it should ideally be more user-friendly, customers often find themselves having to manage it post-deployment.

I have been using Skyhigh Security for six months.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. It takes 30 minutes for normal while for bigger deployment, it may take upto two hours. You have to install the agent, and install the certificate. One engineer is enough to deploy to maintain the solution.

The pricing varies depending on factors such as requirements and the management. While it may not be the cheapest option, it's generally reasonable for what it offers. Ultimately, the cost depends on the deal and the level of service required.

FortiGuard is a little easy to manage.

The functionality of Skyhigh Security is comprehensive, but it may be complex for our customers. The technical team can navigate it, ordinary users may find it daunting without extensive research. They may require assistance from MSP for effective management. The portal should be designed to be user-friendly, ensuring ease of understanding for the IT team or any other relevant department.

The DLP component ensures compliance with HIPAA and PI regulations. They maintain a static portal to track other compliance requirements they're adhering to.

I recommend the solution. However, they'll need well-trained professionals to manage it effectively. If you have another VPN and connect it to this network, it may cause some issues and require constant troubleshooting. This could potentially block agents, so it's important to carefully configure the settings from the outset. Fine-tuning is necessary, so it's crucial to dedicate time and effort to the project.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use Skyhigh Security to block user access or personal access. We have some services to prevent users from consuming all bandwidth for some applications that are very important for the organization. We also use the solution to permit some users to access personal networks.

The solution provides great security, higher availability, and policy granularity. Its integration with Active Directory and troubleshooting are important. The solution also provides easy integration and implementation.

The only problem I had with the solution was its bad integration with security devices. The feature that we would like to have is a hybrid environment, including both cloud and on-premises. Some users don't have a hybrid model.

I have been using Skyhigh Security for four years.

Skyhigh Security is a very stable solution.

The solution provides very good scalability.

The solution's initial setup is easy. Since our company has a very clear internet surfing policy, it is easy to implement it on the device without any problem. The solution's deployment takes one month. One engineer from my team and one engineer from the vendor side helped with the deployment process.

We have a centralized model where our appliance is centralized. It's easy to maintain and upgrade the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.