We performed a comparison between ESET Cloud Apps Protection and Kaspersky Security for Mail Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Email Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"The most valuable feature is the integration. It's a single console, so we don't have to switch around between multiple products. Another valuable feature is the ease of operations and maintenance."
"It also gives me good visibility because, with Defender, I'm using a Microsoft product to defend Microsoft products. The integration was really seamless and I have wide visibility because it picks up almost everything. Literally, I can see almost every activity that happens, from the e-mail to the workstation itself."
"Some of the valuable features on the email side are anti-phishing, anti-malware, and Safe Links."
"The email protection is excellent, especially in terms of anti-phishing policies."
"Defender for Office 365 has helped eliminate having to look at multiple dashboards and that is the aspect I like most about it. It is simpler, effective, and convenient. The users like the process efficiency."
"It also gives the vulnerability status according to the versions you have selected. Let's say you have Google Chrome. It mentions the versions it has, and it updates. Within two hours of an update, it is reflected in the dashboard. That's really nice to have."
"The technical support is good and quick to resolve issues."
"The most valuable features are the precision of detection and the level of customization of the policy."
"We are close to having 99% or 98% detection."
"The integration rate is very high in Kaspersky, which is why most of our customers like it."
"The most valuable features are the anti-phishing and anti-spam capabilities."
"You can install the plugins on the same machine hosting your exchange solution. It's a good complement for Sophos security, which scans the traffic before it reaches your mail service. Kaspersky is on the mail server itself while Sophos handles the incoming traffic. With both of them working together, we have the perfect solution for mail."
"The most valuable feature is the straightforward setup."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is a highly reliable and dependable solution."
"There's room for improvement regarding the time frame for retrieving emails."
"Microsoft should provide more documentation for users so they can self-educate. I would like to see more documentation for advanced security features."
"In some situations, it has not been able to pick impersonated emails having no attachments. Technical support definitely has a scope for improvement."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 could improve by giving customers information on techniques to prevent threats. For example, information about best practices on how to protect their own devices against hackers and scammers, such as educational information or training. This would help others have a better understanding of cyber security. Additionally, there can be more security features added."
"There is room for improvement with the UI."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 should be more proactive."
"The only thing they should improve is the licensing model. They should stop changing it. A year ago, the five features I mentioned were included in one product. Now, three of them are bundled into one product, and you have to pay extra for the other two. I don't mind paying extra, but I don't want them to change it every year or every six months. I need to know what I'm looking at and not worry about it next year."
"It's not easy for an admin to check and decide if the email is good or not."
"The specific domain file for Apache needs to be well-defined."
"Kaspersky lacks in the area of customization, so simpler customization options need to be provided to users."
"The solution is not 100 percent stable and that can use improvement."
"The biggest problem in the solution is related to its license renewal since it is pretty hard in Kaspersky to find out the procedure to renew a license."
"Encrypted email attachments are not being monitored by this solution, which is an area that they need to work on."
"It would be great if Kaspersky could do what Sophos does for us. However, we love having these two different technologies doing the same thing. Sometimes Sophos has the patch to block a novel threat, but Kaspersky doesn't."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Kaspersky Security for Mail Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
ESET Cloud Apps Protection is ranked 22nd in Email Security with 2 reviews while Kaspersky Security for Mail Server is ranked 21st in Email Security with 5 reviews. ESET Cloud Apps Protection is rated 9.6, while Kaspersky Security for Mail Server is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ESET Cloud Apps Protection writes "Great protection, good privacy, and helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Security for Mail Server writes "A stable product that offers a very high rate of integration to its users". ESET Cloud Apps Protection is most compared with Fortinet FortiMail, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) and Perception Point Advanced Email Security, whereas Kaspersky Security for Mail Server is most compared with Fortinet FortiMail, Barracuda Email Security Gateway, Cisco Secure Email, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) and Sophos Email. See our ESET Cloud Apps Protection vs. Kaspersky Security for Mail Server report.
See our list of best Email Security vendors.
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.