We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Email and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."It gives us visibility into threats and, for endpoints, it helps us to prioritize threats. We used to have a lack of visibility, but now our time to detect and respond has decreased."
"The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"At the moment we are satisfied with this product. It's a stable, scalable, and resilient solution for us."
"The solution is very easy to use. All you have to do is to assign the license to the end-user and it's done. The customer will only have the feature activated, and the solution will monitor the emails to determine if they are a threat or not."
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"Some of the valuable features on the email side are anti-phishing, anti-malware, and Safe Links."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365's most valuable feature is its performance."
"This solution provides some benefits, like comfortable access to TAC support. You get prompt support when working directly with Cisco."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"Cisco Secure Email is a budget-friendly solution."
"The tech engineers are very knowledgeable."
"The malicious URL scanning, as well as the anti-malware features, have been really useful for us in our environment."
"Anti-Spam and Advanced Malware Protection are the most valuable features... and we also have the option to block Zero-day attacks."
"The tool has a DLP solution which we can implement. Its database is updated regularly."
"We like the in-built features, like the email filtering based on the IP and domain. Cisco has its own blacklisted domains and IPs, which is very good. This filters around 70 percent of emails from spam, and we are seeing fewer false positives with this."
"The solution’s administration is easy."
"The GUI is quite nice."
"Transparent Mode: Since we have multiple sites and roaming users, it has helped us in deploying the proxy to users without having to push any configurations to end users."
"The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Web Security is creating the easy to install further policies that are deployed through the Forcepoint security manual at some stage. Just drag and drop and the policies are there."
"It allowed our company to not worry about the security of a page, but talk more about the content and the productivity of specific types of web categories."
"The solution provided our organization with easy and secure internet access."
"The customization and control of URL filtering and the integration with other Forcepoint solutions are great features."
"Most valuable features are content filtering and monitoring."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 must improve the overall management style, including the GUI. It also needs to change the filters so that it is easy to whitelist and blacklist data."
"In some situations, it has not been able to pick impersonated emails having no attachments. Technical support definitely has a scope for improvement."
"This product's effectiveness could be improved, in terms of detecting unwanted spam or even malware between the emails, compared to other products."
"They can improve their security in a way where a customer can know if all their attachments are safe or not to open through a report. The solution does its job perfectly, but it never reports to the customer whether those attachments have been stopped before or not."
"Too many false positives and lacks an accurate capability to detect malicious SharePoint sites."
"The phishing and spam filters could use some improvement."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"There needs to be an improvement in integrating the product to work across multiple operating systems, and to have better support for non-Microsoft file types."
"Cisco Secure Email can be improved from the administrator's point of view. Usually, you have to work with different areas, and they can try to make it easy for the administrator to use different functions."
"The Forged Email Detection feature needs improvement, particularly with domain. The sensors are not that good and the rules sets are unclear."
"The configuration UI should be made more intuitive. Currently, it takes a while to understand how to do the basic configurations."
"The graphical user interface is not user-friendly like other vendors. I find it very difficult at times to find some options on the UI."
"In future releases, I would like to see two main improvements come to mind. First, the current solution requires maintaining two separate operating systems for FTD, which can be cumbersome. I'd love to see a single operating system for the FTD box."
"My opinion on the licensing of this solution is that it is a mess that needs sorting out. I am not particularly bothered by pricing as I administer it and make recommendations for people to buy or not to buy."
"We have occasionally had hardware problems because we are using an appliance-based solution, but that might change. We may consider going to virtual systems."
"They could improve the filters. In my time at the company, there were several times we had to contact support to update the filters."
"The Sandbox solution should be integrated with the NIST to handle whatever new vulnerabilities or new sites are identified as potential threats."
"A feature we wish to see addressed in the next release of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway involves its administration."
"We are using a V10000 G3 appliance. It is just a proxy. It is just HTTP, FTP, and HTTPS. Now, as our website has developed and we are using rich time-connectivity protocols, the proxy doesn't have the ability to work with these protocols. It would be nice if the UDP feature was there for it to filter UDP traffic. It needs firewall capabilities for UDP filtering. Its upgrades can be quite complex, and they don't always go as per the plan. Its reporting could be a bit more granular."
"What's missing in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is a specific level of micro-control on protocols or devices, for example, where you can control a particular user or user device."
"The initial setup was complex."
"It has a problem with tablets and the iPhone. It's not filtering on these platforms. It filters on Windows but not iOS or Android."
"The reporting could be improved."
"Improve detailed guidelines to deploy the transparent proxy to Firefox users."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 2nd in Email Security with 56 reviews while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 5th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 47 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4, while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Email writes "Has effortless spam control, improves security posture, and frees up our IT department's time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway writes "Simple to set up, reliable, and offers great reporting". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Trellix Collaboration Security, Fortinet FortiMail, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Proofpoint Email Protection and Trend Micro Email Security, whereas Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy, Fortinet FortiProxy and Forcepoint ONE.
We monitor all Email Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.