We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense and Mimecast Email Security 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."At the moment we are satisfied with this product. It's a stable, scalable, and resilient solution for us."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"The good part is that you don't have to configure it, which is very convenient."
"Threat Explorer is one of the features that I very much like because it is a real-time report that allows you to identify, analyze, and trace security attacks."
"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."
"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."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"I would say it's very comprehensive, with multiple antivirus OEMs, virus encrypt features, encryption, and more."
"Secure Email Threat Defense's scalability is good."
"It has an efficient email filtering feature."
"Cisco has a threat mechanism called cloud-based Talos, where all the threats are inbuilt."
"On ease of use, it rates very high. It's something that I was able to get into without really looking at any documentation. I wanted to see what it felt like before I started looking at any documentation on how to use it, and it was very easy to use. It works very smoothly. The user experience is very intuitive. They did an amazing job on that."
"The ability to see east-west traffic is its most valuable feature. Traditionally, email defense focuses on north-south, inbound-outbound, egress-ingress traffic. With Cisco Secure Email Cloud Mailbox, it's able to quickly identify, track, tag, and categorize emails that are internal. That can typically give us visibility into if there's an internal compromised account (for example). Someone can then use that internal compromised account to email additional accounts with either malicious software or links, but internal within that Office tenant. Effectively, that email message never leaves the tenant. Any of the mail gateways really do not have any method or way of seeing this traffic since it's not leaving the environment."
"It's very easy to deploy and configure."
"Cisco Secure Email Cloud Mailbox can handle a complete portfolio, which is required to protect any kind of attack coming from emails. However, it does not have advanced phishing, but it is available through Cisco. If you compare Cisco Secure Email Cloud Mailbox with the competition, in the competition you have to have one or two solutions together to address the customer's requirement, whereas Cisco Secure Email Cloud Mailbox is addressing everything, such as web domain and email protection. If there is any kind of challenge it will come across through email."
"The solution is pretty straightforward to use and easy to set up."
"The solution offers good technical support."
"Email security is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"It's really quite user-friendly. In terms of technical superiority and the product itself, there are no complaints. It is really cutting edge."
"Due to our specialized use case, that HIPAA dictionary really comes in handy."
"What I like about the integration is that it is directly into Microsoft 365, users can use their Microsoft 365 credentials to log into the portal and access their mail."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"There's room for improvement regarding the time frame for retrieving emails."
"The product must provide better malware detection."
"About eight months ago, we started to measure the quantity of phishing and spam that we have been receiving, and it has been increasing a lot. That means that protection for our email is not as good as we were expecting."
"The visibility for the weaknesses in the system and unauthorized access can be improved."
"You should be able to deploy Defender for every subscription without the need to add servers."
"Several simulation options are available within 365, and the phishing simulation could be better."
"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."
"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."
"From a technical point of view, Cisco is far behind in terms of cybersecurity, and it has to improve very much."
"There is still room for improvement in terms of integrations with other Cisco tools and non-Cisco tools. There is also some room for improvement needed in terms of the reporting."
"We encounter issues while searching for missing emails."
"Cisco Secure Email Cloud Mailbox can improve by adding advanced phishing, then the solution would become the best in the market. However, this could increase the price even more. Additionally, if CES with domain protection could be added it would be an even better solution."
"The tool gives false positives and it needs to be more accurate. I would like to see AI as a new feature."
"The search area has room for improvement. When you go to the next page, it remains at the bottom of the current page that you're on. Also, under the reports section, it allows you to see any "convictions," but if you want to search for those convictions you have to remember when they all came in and go back and edit the search accordingly. You cannot click on the list of convictions to actually see if you had a spike at a certain time."
"Customers will benefit greatly from monthly billing because the majority of customers today use the cloud, be it Office 365, or Google Cloud."
"This solution could be improved by integration with Sandbox."
"They should improve the cookies management feature."
"While it's quick and easy, the initial setup could be more user-friendly."
"I'd like to have better support from the product in the future."
"The reaction time between a new threat being identified and Mimecast picking it up needs to be narrowed a bit."
"The solution should include more AI features instead of Mimecast's more general static configuration tooling."
"The attachment scanning feature doesn't work properly."
"The installation is not so straightforward."
"Its pricing can be improved. It is a bit expensive."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense is ranked 16th in Email Security with 11 reviews while Mimecast Email Security is ranked 5th in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 23 reviews. Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense is rated 8.2, while Mimecast Email Security is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense writes "Easy to deploy and configure with excellent support". 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 Threat Defense is most compared with Cisco Secure Email, Kiteworks, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Abnormal Security and Armorblox, whereas Mimecast Email Security is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Abnormal Security, Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, Cisco Secure Email and Fortinet FortiMail. See our Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense 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.