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."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."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 helps people to work remotely. It is a secure solution. We don't need to use our company's computers or get VPN connections to the networks. I can control how they share screens and what they send to the devices. It keeps our organizations confidential and sensitive information safe."
"Microsoft Defender has a feature to protect each and every attachment. Even if it's an encrypted attachment, it will check for any potential threats."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"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 basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"The tool comes with AI features. It is good for clients who already use Cisco products due to integration."
"It blocks bulk marketing messages, graymail, spam, and provides advanced malware protection."
"I love the Advanced Malware Protection feature. It works very well... The appliance has more security such as SDF, DKIM, DMARC, and encryption."
"Administration of the email domains and custom filters are easily done via the web interface."
"Capital expenditure is a significant consideration, and the impact on major expenditures prompts a careful analysis before onboarding the new product."
"It has the ability to tell us, after an email has been delivered, where else it went, once it got inside. Maybe it's something we wanted it to stop and it didn't stop it, but it notified us later that it was something that it should have stopped. It can give us a trajectory of all the other places that it went internally and it can tell us what files were transferred as well."
"The solution is very configurable. It has enabled us to configure some specific filters to stop emails that general configurations didn't stop. It's a powerful solution. It can analyze a lot of emails simultaneously, with no problems of capacity or system load."
"The most valuable feature is the different content filters we are using, such as DKIM."
"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 customization and control of URL filtering and the integration with other Forcepoint solutions are great features."
"For the most part, the solution, when set up correctly, works fine."
"I have found the web content filtering and malware filter the most valuable."
"Reporting and automatic updates of website categorization."
"The critical role is web URL filtering."
"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 initial setup is not complex."
"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."
"Too many false positives and lacks an accurate capability to detect malicious SharePoint sites."
"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."
"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."
"The phishing and spam filters could use some improvement."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Licensing is quite complicated for a number of customers, including ourselves."
"There are some concerns in the way the architecture is set up, making it an area where improvements are required."
"If you are not a technical guy, it is hard to maneuver, but as soon as you work on it, it gets better and better. If there was a better way to know how to do things or how to find things, it would be good."
"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 hardware is not up to the mark. Two to three times a year we have complete downtime."
"There could be additional DLP functionality for it."
"The solution does not have a strong outbound service. It should also integrate DLP."
"I have some frustrations with the user experience in the interface, specifically with regard to making a list of people for whom I want to allow email access."
"It takes 20 to 30 minutes for policy replication."
"I would suggest focusing on improving the GUI's stability, especially when implementing new filters or patches."
"The solution should be better able to support itself and operate faster. Sometimes the technical support team takes too long to respond."
"A room for improvement in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is the support it offers. It's very bad. What I'd like to see in the next release of the product is for it to be less complicated because at the moment Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is more complicated than other products. Sometimes issues come up that you can't solve without the support team. For example, you should write the root password to fix the issue. In the next release of the product, it would be good if it had an easy-to-use interface. Troubleshooting issues in Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway should be less complicated as well."
"The Sandbox solution should be integrated with the NIST to handle whatever new vulnerabilities or new sites are identified as potential threats."
"Ease of use could be improved."
"The reporting could be improved."
"In the on-premises version, I don't like the deployment and structuring of the device."
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, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), 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 FortiProxy.
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.