We performed a comparison between AppRiver Email Security and Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."Microsoft Defender for Office 365 has improved my organization's security. It makes it easier to manage the infrastructure without the help of third-party applications."
"I would say that 90% of the spam and phishing attack emails get blocked right off the bat."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365's most valuable features are safe attachments and safe links."
"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."
"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."
"The risk level notifications are most valuable. We get to know what kind of intrusion or attack is there, and we can fix a problem on time."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is the ease of use."
"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's easy to use and user-friendly. Users can also easily release spam emails."
"They are very easy to use."
"The filtering of the solution is very good. You can do URL filtering and, while you need a custom URL to filter under other solutions like Symantec, here the solution covers most categories and the database."
"Forcepoint Email Security is a good solution, and I don't have any issues with it. I found anti-spam and anti-spyware the most valuable features of Forcepoint Email Security."
"I like how versatile the options are. For example, we can set it where we are able to access and browse Facebook but we are denied the ability to post photos. There is also that ability integrate with Office 365 - SharePoint app."
"It's easier to deploy than other options."
"This is a reasonably stable solution."
"The feature I find most valuable is the web, email and DLP integration."
"The most valuable features of Forcepoint Email Security are the integration with other solutions. It provides a more secure infrastructure and views for the customers from the DLP. You can work on URLs, files, and advanced inspections that will protect the customers."
"Using Forcepoint, we have created policies and rules for any suspicious mail. It is blocked and only released by an admin's approval."
"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."
"Several simulation options are available within 365, and the phishing simulation could be better."
"The XDR dashboard has room for improvement."
"In one of the reports I can get the exact place where a vulnerable file resides. But for that, I need to explicitly go into the device and check. If they could include that file part in the report, without my having to go to the device itself, that would help."
"One area for improvement is integration. For example, when it comes to external SaaS platforms, we were not able to get a lot of information on integrations with such apps for security and authentication."
"There's room for improvement regarding the time frame for retrieving emails."
"We need a separate license and we don't know how to get the license that is required."
"There is room for improvement with the UI."
"It needs to make sure that the application is up to date with new attacks. They should also send us the demo or introductions for their new incoming features."
"Email security checks contain a small number of false positives."
"The solution could use better integration capabilities."
"It's quite difficult to learn this solution, it's not an entry level product. If you are a skilled user you will think it's a very useful tool, but if you are not a skilled user, you'll think it is very difficult to learn."
"I would like to see some improvement like cloud application and integration capabilities and the classification part is missing from the DLP."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved, as it is not customizable."
"We've fixed a couple of issues on the solution so far. It doesn't work perfectly all the time."
"This solution could be improved by providing further functionality to reduce or to block ransom attacks, cross-site scripting and man-in-the-middle attacks."
"Customer support could be better."
"Forcepoint Email Security is stable, but it could be improved."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppRiver Email Security is ranked 22nd in Email Security with 2 reviews while Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Email Security with 14 reviews. AppRiver Email Security is rated 9.0, while Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AppRiver Email Security writes "Pricing that is competitive, excellent technical support, and email security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] writes "Easy to use and setup and expands well". AppRiver Email Security is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Avanan, Proofpoint Email Protection, Barracuda Email Security Gateway and IRONSCALES, whereas Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] is most compared with .
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.