We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Email and GWAVA [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."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."
"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."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is a stable solution."
"It gives us visibility into threats and, for endpoints, it helps us to prioritize threats. We used to have a lack of visibility, but now our time to detect and respond has decreased."
"I would say that 90% of the spam and phishing attack emails get blocked right off the bat."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is the ease of use."
"The tool comes with AI features. It is good for clients who already use Cisco products due to integration."
"Cisco Secure Email Cloud Gateway has allowed our users to be able to concentrate on the emails that they do receive. Previously, our users had to deal with nine million additional emails across the organization, which is nearly 1,000 emails per user to have to deal with a month. That's a massive amount for our staff to deal with and probably several hours of their time. We have a lot of clinical staff, being a hospital. We want to make our staff as productive as possible. By removing a lot of that spam and phishing type emails, this allows them to do their job."
"Because we scan products, and there is a lot of critical data, security is very important in these cases."
"There were detailed logs available. That was a seriously good feature... It turns out these were actually spoof emails that came into our environment. I got to know about them from the log system."
"I love the Advanced Malware Protection feature. It works very well... The appliance has more security such as SDF, DKIM, DMARC, and encryption."
"At one point, there was a zero-day attack. The Cisco appliance detected it and stopped it, helping us out. We avoided the attack and potential damage."
"It blocks bulk marketing messages, graymail, spam, and provides advanced malware protection."
"The malicious URL scanning, as well as the anti-malware features, have been really useful for us in our environment."
"It's a perfect business pump filter. We have much less false positives, and also less spam than other organizations."
"The pre-sales cost calculations could be more transparent."
"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."
"Too many false positives and lacks an accurate capability to detect malicious SharePoint sites."
"There is room for improvement in terms of reporting."
"Several simulation options are available within 365, and the phishing simulation could be better."
"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."
"Configuration requires going to a lot of places rather than just accessing one tab."
"There is room for improvement with the UI."
"There could be additional DLP functionality for it."
"The product's GUI for the dashboard needs improvement."
"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 tool's pricing can be improved."
"The Forged Email Detection feature needs improvement, particularly with domain. The sensors are not that good and the rules sets are unclear."
"Many smaller businesses opt for more cost-effective solutions, such as Gmail or Hotmail accounts, instead of investing in Cisco Secure Email, given its higher cost."
"The user interface is a bit complex."
"We cannot manage multiple devices from a single UI."
"The solution needs to be more user-friendly. I don't want to have to go to my IT guy and have him explain aspects of the solution to me. There should be a way for them to be able to translate aspects of the product to a typical user in a clear concise way."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 2nd in Email Security with 55 reviews while GWAVA [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Email Security. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4, while GWAVA [EOL] is rated 9.0. 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 GWAVA [EOL] writes "An excellent anti-spam solution for mail systems". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Trellix Collaboration Security, Fortinet FortiMail, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Proofpoint Email Protection and Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense, whereas GWAVA [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.