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."Our customers are satisfied with Defender for 365 because Microsoft products are easy to use and customize to meet the client's needs. Everything is in one place, so we can adjust policies as needed for phishing, DLP, ATP, or any other security features that our clients want to apply."
"Defender helps us prioritize threats across our organization."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"The two main features that prove most beneficial for us are URL scanning and attachment scanning."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"The benefit that stands out to me is the ability for multiple individuals to collaborate simultaneously within the same document. Additionally, there is the option to save the document directly in the integrated OneDrive or SharePoint."
"Safe attachments, safe links, policies, and the ability to protect from zero-day threats are the most valuable features."
"Defender enables us to secure all 365-related activity from a single place. It gives us visibility into everything happening in Outlook, protecting us against phishing and other email-based threats. Defender helps us detect any suspicious behaviors."
"The system provides our service desk with the means to troubleshoot email delivery issues with ease."
"Capital expenditure is a significant consideration, and the impact on major expenditures prompts a careful analysis before onboarding the new product."
"The user interface was quite friendly, it was quite easy to use, unlike some other Cisco products. Anybody could use it. You don't have to be familiar with IT to be able to handle navigating it."
"The strong point of the solution is that we hardly get any spam emails because of Cisco Secure Email."
"The tool comes with AI features. It is good for clients who already use Cisco products due to integration."
"The security features are valuable."
"The most valuable features are Advanced Malware Protection, URL filtering, and of course Reputation Filtering."
"The solution works well."
"The feature that I find to be most valuable is the flexibility of the single endpoint."
"The solution provided our organization with easy and secure internet access."
"The GUI is quite nice."
"The customization and control of URL filtering and the integration with other Forcepoint solutions are great features."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow or block sites by category."
"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."
"Real-time category protection."
"The Forcepoint client software can be downloaded on a user's machine so that it can filter the sites from home or the office. That's one of the biggest features. We can use it for filtering our laptops for our users at any place."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 should improve the troubleshooting tools. It's unclear whether the device is blocked at the firewall level or at the device itself. The granularity needed for troubleshooting is currently lacking. From my perspective, Microsoft should address this issue to benefit many users who likely share the same sentiment."
"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."
"The custom alerts have to improve a lot."
"It would be better if it were more scalable. It depends on the architecture, but we would like to make it more scalable for both data centers."
"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."
"Microsoft should provide more documentation for users so they can self-educate. I would like to see more documentation for advanced security features."
"The GUI is sometimes slow to fetch the device report and could be improved."
"They have moved features from one console to another. Things have been moved around in the interface and it takes me time to find where certain features are."
"Scalability has certain shortcomings and needs to be improved because there are service providers who provide better scalability.v"
"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."
"The hardware is not up to the mark. Two to three times a year we have complete downtime."
"The user interface could be updated."
"Cisco is already providing a very good environment with the IronPort solution, but there could be some more integration with other products. For instance, an integration with the EDR solution could be there to raise an alert."
"I would like to see sandboxing for email, where suspicious emails received by the system are analyzed through online services."
"It would be nice to have an easier way to check on the health of the system, how stressed these appliances are. Sure, you can do it, but it would be helpful to have an easier way to do it, maybe even at a glance."
"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."
"Security of browsing."
"It's the support that's the problem because that's a different question from the product itself — it's the Achilles heel."
"The performance issues in the product are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would suggest focusing on improving the GUI's stability, especially when implementing new filters or patches."
"The documentation is almost too much, it could be laid out in an easier to understand."
"An area for improvement would be the classification of websites - it can take a long time for new websites to be classified."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The firewall doesn't have any features because some customers are requesting they will install the firewall without licensing. At this time we cannot go further without licensing. Licensing is a must with Forcepoint Web Security firewalls."
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 26 reviews while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 6th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 17 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.6, while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Email writes "The amount of traffic that it stops is massive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway writes "Reasonably priced, easy to set up, and offers near real-time reporting capabilities". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Trellix Collaboration Security, Fortinet FortiMail, Proofpoint Email Protection and Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense, whereas Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy and Fortinet FortiGate SWG.
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.