We compared Cisco Secure Email and Mimecast Email Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Cisco Secure Email offers advanced protection against phishing attacks, reputation-based filtering, and robust tracking functionalities. Mimecast Email Security is appreciated for its efficient archiving capabilities and effective protection against targeted threats. Its seamless integration with Microsoft 365 also earned high marks.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Secure Email should improve global malicious email defense, data loss prevention, and integration with third-party solutions. Mimecast Email Security should focus on improving its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and ease of setup.
Service and Support: Cisco support is generally considered knowledgeable and helpful, but a few users reported slow response times and difficulty navigating the support process. Mimecast's customer service elicits varied opinions, with some customers expressing satisfaction with its responsiveness and effectiveness, while others perceive it as unsatisfactory.
Ease of Deployment: Cisco Secure Email is generally straightforward and seamless to set up. It provides a modular and adaptable environment, but new users may need training. Users had mixed experiences with Mimecast Email Security's setup. Some users found it fast and uncomplicated, while others found it moderately complex.
Pricing: Opinions on the pricing of Cisco Secure Email are mixed. Some find it expensive but worth the investment, while others find it reasonably priced and competitive with other vendors. Mimecast Email Security is generally seen as costly, and some users struggle to justify the expense. It’s perceived as more expensive than competing solutions.
ROI: Cisco Secure Email's return on investment is influenced by factors such as use case, organization size, and industry. It is challenging to measure the return on investment for Mimecast Email Security.
Comparison Results: Cisco Secure Email is highly regarded for its intelligence threat detection, reputation filtering, and robust tracking abilities. The solution’s areas for improvement include data loss prevention and third-party integration. Mimecast is commended for its archiving and targeted threat protection capabilities. On the other hand, Mimecast faces challenges with its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and high pricing.
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"The email protection is excellent, especially in terms of anti-phishing policies."
"The two main features that prove most beneficial for us are URL scanning and attachment scanning."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365's most valuable features are safe attachments and safe links."
"The most valuable feature is protection against malicious links, fishing, and impersonation. You can train people to be aware of these threats, but they're not always careful. When they're using their phones between meetings, they click on a link, and it's game over."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is the ease of use."
"There is a huge return compared to if we didn't have a gateway appliance, as far as blocking malicious emails."
"Cisco Secure Email has strong inbound services."
"There were detailed logs available. That was a seriously good feature... It turns out these were actually spoof emails that came into our environment. I got to know about them from the log system."
"It's a bit easy to handle Cisco Secure Email; it's not that difficult. For the logs, which are in PDF format, it's not hard to read them. We don't need Wireshark much to analyze the logs."
"The solution works well."
"The strong point of the solution is that we hardly get any spam emails because of Cisco Secure Email."
"The most valuable features are protection against ransomware and spam."
"Initially, the most valuable feature for us was the SenderBase Reputation, because that reduced the number of emails that were even considered by the system by a huge number..."
"The solution offers good technical support."
"The solution's performance is good."
"It's really quite user-friendly. In terms of technical superiority and the product itself, there are no complaints. It is really cutting edge."
"The piece that is most valuable from the Mimecast standpoint will be the sandboxing feature."
"It does a good job for us, and its admin console is easy to use."
"Email security is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"We like Mimecast's spam filtering. The email signature feature is also a big plus for our users."
"The solution is pretty straightforward to use and easy to set up."
"The product must provide better malware detection."
"Microsoft sometimes has downtime, and we'll get several incidents coming in back to back. We have a huge backlog of notifications, many of which may be false positives. However, there might be serious alerts, so we can't risk dismissing all of them at once."
"Configuration requires going to a lot of places rather than just accessing one tab."
"Microsoft security solutions work as expected. They are constantly updating the solutions to make them better. At the same time, the changes can impact a customer's environment, and we need to adjust settings. Sometimes we aren't aware of the changes, and nothing is pushed from the backend automatically."
"We noticed that from time to time, Microsoft's stability does have problems. Sometimes the service goes up and down. Sometimes they change without prior notice."
"We need a separate license and we don't know how to get the license that is required."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"The certification training for Defender for 365 needs to be deeper and incorporate Sentinel. I took all the security courses except one, and Sentinel isn't included."
"We cannot manage multiple devices from a single UI."
"The interface is dated. It has looked pretty much the same for 15 years or so. It would be helpful to be able to do everything from one spot. The centralized quarantine and reporting are completely separate from policy administration."
"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."
"I would like more functionality and how to use it for Level 2 type staff. The biggest issue is it needs to be easier to use and navigate."
"The management features of the product are not up to date."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved."
"One of the things that Cisco could improve on with IronPort is the support. Cisco doesn't really have enough engineers who have full, hands-on knowledge of IronPort. Knowledge of it is not something you can find easily compared to other security appliances."
"The solution needs to improve its advanced phishing filters. It is very good at filtering things which have bad reputations. However, when phishing or malicious emails are new or coming from a legitimate source, we don't feel that the solution is working."
"The price could be better, it should be reduced."
"While it's quick and easy, the initial setup could be more user-friendly."
"We have subscribed to an archival service, and yet, when we have to get our data out, we have to pay a fee to get our own data. They charge an extraction fee."
"Many of our users complain that the system is blocking too many attachments. It's a good practice from a security perspective, but our users think Mimecast is doing too much. It might be something we'll have to adjust."
"As a user, the user interface of the management console could be upgraded, for example."
"They should improve the cookies management feature."
"The reaction time between a new threat being identified and Mimecast picking it up needs to be narrowed a bit."
"Its pricing can be improved. It is a bit expensive."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 2nd in Email Security with 55 reviews while Mimecast Email Security is ranked 5th in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 23 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4, while Mimecast Email Security 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 Mimecast Email Security writes "It gives clients peace of mind and helps them educate their users about threats". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Trellix Collaboration Security, Fortinet FortiMail, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Proofpoint Email Protection and IRONSCALES, whereas Mimecast Email Security is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Abnormal Security, Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, Fortinet FortiMail and Darktrace. See our Cisco Secure Email vs. Mimecast Email Security report.
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.