Skyhigh Security Service Edge (SSE)

I do not use Skyhigh Security  firsthand, but M.Tech Philippines distributes Skyhigh Security  as one of the authorized distributors. My main use case for Skyhigh Security in my role as a distributor is to position SWG in the market. We have noticed that companies in the Philippines are not yet ready for the full SSE suite. As a startup, we are positioning SWG because the Philippines is not yet ready for the whole SSE suite unless it is mandated by the bank.

One specific example of how we have positioned SWG with a client is that M.Tech used to be a distributor of Broadcom or Blue Coat in the Philippines, and we lost the distributorship, which was transferred to Wesco. One of the strategies we are using is to approach those customers who are Broadcom or Blue Coat users and replace it with SWG. We are offering a competitive swap campaign or displacement campaign, and we are offering high incentives for those partners who will position and replace Broadcom and Blue Coat.

Skyhigh Security has positively impacted my organization because we have acquired new customers in Skyhigh Security for M.Tech Philippines. For example, we have BPOs or call center companies that are using Skyhigh Security, and that is the direction of their headquarters, especially in the US. We are leveraging that market if they have an approach or advice from their HQ that they should use Skyhigh Security also in the Philippines. We are looking for those customers as well. That is one of our advantages because most of the time, those customers do not have purchasing power, so they are relying heavily on what their headquarters is using.

We do not need to conduct a lot of proofs of concept or extensive effort because they will replicate the setup in the Philippines. A faster procurement cycle has been achieved because we do not need to conduct a lot of proofs of value or proofs of concept, since they already know the solution. Their advice is to use it and implement it in the Philippines. They have already managed it, implemented it, and can deploy it without needing our support. It is easier for us to sell to those kinds of markets.

One specific example of how we have positioned SWG with a client is that M.Tech used to be a distributor of Broadcom or Blue Coat in the Philippines, and we lost the distributorship, which was transferred to Wesco. One of the strategies we are using is to approach those customers who are Broadcom or Blue Coat users and replace it with SWG. We are offering a competitive swap campaign or displacement campaign, and we are offering high incentives for those partners who will position and replace Broadcom and Blue Coat.

Regarding features from a technical perspective, we have integration capabilities because we already have a lot of McAfee or FireEye  customers. We are leveraging Trellix database, data, and Trellix customers, and it is easy for us to integrate with Trellix because we can use the same ePO. As part of the DLP  requirements, Skyhigh Security has a lot of disadvantages in the Philippines. That is what we are hearing from the market, so we are slowly losing market share.

From my perspective as a distributor and based on feedback from my clients, Skyhigh Security has a bit of a disadvantage in the Philippines. First, Skyhigh Security is not offering the full SASE  suite, so we are just focused on SSE. We do not have SD-WAN unlike the competitors in the Philippines. Second, Skyhigh Security does not have a local representative in the Philippines. Knowing the Philippine market, it is easy for competitors to penetrate the market if they have a good relationship directly with the customer, and that is what we are lacking in the Philippines. Third, since the acquisition of STG, we need to do a lot of awareness activities, and we need to do a lot of brand awareness compared to our competitors in the Philippines like NetSkope and Zscaler. That is actually the disadvantage, as we are not seeing a lot of advantages of Skyhigh Security in the Philippines, but more on the challenges that we are experiencing as a distributor.

To improve Skyhigh Security, they need to have a local representative in the Philippines. For us to penetrate the Philippine market, it should be a local Filipino native that can speak in our local dialect, Tagalog. That is one of the advantages that Skyhigh Security can offer. Second, we need to do a lot of demand generation and lead generation activities wherein we need to invest in a lot of marketing development funds for us to do brand awareness and join collaborative activities with other vendors. Third, as a distributor, we have to work together and leverage the existing databases of our customers. We have to do a lot of integration and collaboration with other cybersecurity vendors for us to bring Skyhigh Security into the picture. Those are the things that we need to improve.

I chose a seven because, from the business perspective, SWG is cheaper compared to our competing brands. However, those three points are what we need to improve: local representative, marketing development funds, and integration. That is why I put seven in my score.

We are not using Skyhigh Security in our organization, but in general, it is deployed as a professional service, usually based on the customers' needs, typically in a hybrid or private cloud environment.

From my perspective as a distributor and based on my clients' feedback, Skyhigh Security is not stable. I have mentioned earlier the three inputs that we need to improve in the Philippines. Right now, I do not see that it will be stable, and there is no focus in the Philippines.

I do not have feedback from the clients regarding Skyhigh Security's scalability, but as we understand the solution, I think it is very scalable. If I were to score it, I would give it an eight.

Customer support for Skyhigh Security, based on my clients' experience or my own interactions as a distributor, is managed by Trellix, which we do not prefer. What we are doing as a distributor is offering level one support. We are not relying heavily on the vendor when it comes to support because it is not great. They have to improve it.

We have not previously used a different solution in our organization or for our clients because we are distributing it. We are a distributor, so we are not using Skyhigh Security.

I have not seen a return on investment because we are not using it directly.

Regarding pricing, the licensing and pricing for Skyhigh Security, especially for SWG, is cheap. It is very cost-effective, especially knowing the Philippine market. They are also offering the licenses via à la carte, which is very affordable as well.

Before choosing Skyhigh Security to distribute, my company evaluated other options like NetSkope, iboss , and Zscaler.

I always believe that Skyhigh Security works hand-in-hand with Trellix. What we are doing in our approach is to deliver the whole use case from an end-to-end approach, and from on-premises to cloud. We can tie the story together with Trellix since they are from the same mother company, which is STG. It is easy for us to look for opportunities and to penetrate the market if we are using Trellix to integrate the solution.

Regarding Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities, I think the governance and security are not ready in the Philippines. We are seeing in the market that a lot of customers are still using legacy applications and legacy appliances. They are not ready for the cloud, and they still need to host their data on-premises. I think the AI capability cannot be maximized in the Philippines right now. No feedback has been received from partners regarding Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities. We are just seeing that it is not ready. The market in the Philippines is so late and delayed that we are not yet ready for this kind of technology and capabilities.

If others are looking into using Skyhigh Security, I would advise them to talk to us as a distributor. I find this interview great, and you just need to evaluate and reassess if you are talking to the customer, a distributor, or a partner. My overall rating for Skyhigh Security is a seven.

In my day-to-day work, I use Skyhigh Security  to manage two specific people in my team, one being a vendor and the other a full-time employee. I have a different policy for contractors and full-time employees. Using Skyhigh Security, it is easy to implement those policies based on the user, user type, group type, or the device they are using, and the location of the user.

Overall, I personally use Skyhigh Security for Shadow IT discovery, which is very useful. Being able to see which unsanctioned apps employees are accessing helps me prioritize policy decisions, so that secure web gateway and CASB  perform reliably for policy enforcement and filtering. Additionally, integration with my existing infrastructure was smoother than expected.

When I mention flexibility in applying policy, it works for me because I have a device provided by the company, but I can take that device to my personal infrastructure, such as personal hotspots or Wi-Fi. Accordingly, those policies should be implemented where I am right now. It is flexible regarding where your device is and which user is using that device. Accordingly, the policy will be applied.

Skyhigh Security has positively impacted my organization by easing my day-to-day job in managing policies and users. If there is an outrage in terms of a policy change, who changed it, or why a certain website is not working, it is very easy to troubleshoot because I have those reporting systems.

Troubleshooting has become easier with Skyhigh Security. For example, if a certain website is not working, I can easily see where it is failing. During the initial handshake, TCP handshake, or DNS, I can identify if the issue is due to a certificate or a policy. If I discuss the policy, I can determine which policy it is—web filter, application filter, or DLP  policy.

Regarding Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities, my experience shows it is still in a booming state or still scaling up, so it still needs improvement.

Concerning Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities, I find its accuracy and reliability of output to be something I hardly use. I rely more on manual processes because I know where to look and what to look for.

My main use case for Skyhigh Security  is blocking malicious websites, blocking non-DLP acceptable websites, preventing data sharing, enforcing DLP , preventing access to unpleasant websites, and preventing people from using YouTube, advertisement applications, or LinkedIn. We mainly use it to make the work environment dedicated to work without giving employees entertainment that is not allowed.

In my opinion, the best feature Skyhigh Security  offers is its ability to perform deep TLS interception to take action based on that analysis. Deep TLS inspection is a very valuable technology to have with your device.

Skyhigh Security has positively impacted my organization by providing more compliance and more regulatory adherence.

It would be beneficial to have an API for Skyhigh Security. We also experienced some troubleshooting issues when we were troubleshooting our rules, which was not pleasant to manage.

Skyhigh Security can be improved as it lacks debugging capabilities. The main issue is that if we have a website that is blocking Skyhigh Security's proxy, for example a bank website, we will not be able to tell until someone calls us. They do not know enough about our technology because they do not need to be technical experts. Some people are in sales, and some people use their computers for only basic tasks and do not understand that they are being blocked by us or do not know who to contact. We are unable to determine that a banking website is blocking Skyhigh Security through our proxy because the bank is not accepting Skyhigh Security's proxy. Another issue is the lack of API. There is no API available. We tried to contact support about this, and they said there would be an API at the end of quarter one, maybe quarter two, but I am not sure what happened. They did not get back to us.

I chose a rating of eight for Skyhigh Security because of the issues I mentioned, including the lack of API, the lack of troubleshooting and debugging for websites that are blocking us or the end users because of the proxy, and we have to perform a proxy bypass to allow access. Additionally, it does not allow HTTP/3 interception, which is an issue.

I have been using Skyhigh Security for around six months or more. I am Ahmed, a security information specialist at Nornet, and I have been working there for three years, starting last August.

Skyhigh Security is not stable.

Skyhigh Security's scalability is affected by the fact that you make rules that become less maintainable over time because it is like documentation, and it is difficult to document the patches. This is the most frustrating part of everything in technology, as documentation and patching issues are always challenging.

The customer support for Skyhigh Security is great. They are helpful and responsive.

I did not previously use a different solution. We did not have a comparable solution in the past, though we may have had Zscaler or similar offerings, but nothing comparable to Skyhigh Security so far.

I have not seen a return on investment from Skyhigh Security yet. I do not have numbers for this, but it is a sound investment idea. We should develop metrics to measure this.

Before choosing Skyhigh Security, we evaluated some other options but decided to stick with Skyhigh Security. We are also aware of Trellix, but we chose to remain with Skyhigh Security.

Regarding Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities, I have not tried them. I did not hear about Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities, and I only used Skyhigh Security without AI. This is the first time I have heard that Skyhigh Security has AI capabilities.

Skyhigh Security is deployed throughout our organization. According to our engineer, it should be on-premises, and it is deployed on-premises.

My advice to others considering Skyhigh Security is that it has more capabilities than you might initially think. You should make sure to explore everything before you start using it so you can understand all the areas where you can utilize Skyhigh Security, as you might find many other useful options for deployment. An important consideration is to ensure that Skyhigh Security will not negatively affect the daily work of your engineers and employees. You should plan for a smooth implementation of Skyhigh Security because it might block access to resources that it was not intended to restrict.

I have rated Skyhigh Security with a score of eight out of ten.

My main use case for Skyhigh Security  is securing critical SaaS platforms, namely Salesforce  and Office 365 .

A specific example of how I use Skyhigh Security  with Salesforce  and Office 365  is limiting access to the service from managed devices only.

In addition to my main use case, we also provide restricted access to Salesforce from unmanaged devices that keeps the data in Salesforce safe while enabling necessary access.

The best features Skyhigh Security offers are their Shadow IT visibility and Cloud Catalog, which are probably the best in the industry. Their ability to agentlessly enable access for managed devices is great.

The Shadow IT visibility and Cloud Catalog have helped my team by allowing us to move faster with allowing access from all different types of devices, phones and computers, because the agentless portion was beneficial since we did not have to deploy an agent. Their cloud catalog has over 30,000 cloud services and detailed risk ratings and helped us surface use cases that we did not know about that we needed to address.

Skyhigh Security has positively impacted my organization by helping fill a need that was unaddressed at the time, especially as Cloud Access Security Brokers came out and were very popular around 2018. We did not have a standardized set of tools for visibility and control of cloud services, so aggregating Shadow IT logs in one place for visibility was new and powerful.

Skyhigh Security can be improved because their administrative dashboard frequently has issues; it is unresponsive, unusable, or very slow often. The anomalies and threats that are generated are investigated, and they are generally benign or noise. We do not really get actionable anomalies or threats, unfortunately. Sometimes Skyhigh Security does not integrate well or compete well with native capabilities of clouds, such as email DLP  because it does not support Microsoft Purview  encryption, which blinds Skyhigh Security's DLP , creating a large hole. Additionally, the cloud access controls are not fine-grained, so a product like Entra ID can provide fine-grained access to different sub-services of Microsoft, which is better. Furthermore, the DLP policies for Skyhigh Security were never as good as they sounded on paper; lots of trial and error was needed to help put a policy in place, and ultimately, we could not move forward with some policies just because they never worked the way that we thought they should.

They do listen to customers, so that does help there. If you provide feedback, they do address it, which somewhat mitigates the issues.

I have been using Skyhigh Security since 2018.

Their support is somewhat inexperienced and there is a fair amount of turnover within the company that we experienced, which we found challenging; but that may not be atypical for security vendors.

Regarding Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities, I do not have much experience with their AI capabilities. They did have a regex generator that was built in, which was novel, and they helped us surface the use of AI in other platforms, but I have not used any Skyhigh Security AI services.

In terms of Skyhigh Security's AI capabilities, I would characterize them as not mature.

Skyhigh Security is deployed in my organization as a SaaS platform. We only use the Cloud Access Security Broker, so it was all in Skyhigh Security's SaaS.

We did host the cloud connector in Azure , but that is not necessary for the operation of Skyhigh Security, just to help with Shadow IT log processing.

I would advise others looking into using Skyhigh Security to consider the goals of implementing a Cloud Access Security Broker, as a lot of cloud services such as Microsoft and Salesforce have invested heavily in native capabilities. Therefore, it is possible that third-party tooling is not needed. I would rate this product a 4 overall.