We compared Cisco Secure Email and Mimecast Email Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Cisco Secure Email offers advanced protection against phishing attacks, reputation-based filtering, and robust tracking functionalities. Mimecast Email Security is appreciated for its efficient archiving capabilities and effective protection against targeted threats. Its seamless integration with Microsoft 365 also earned high marks.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Secure Email should improve global malicious email defense, data loss prevention, and integration with third-party solutions. Mimecast Email Security should focus on improving its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and ease of setup.
Service and Support: Cisco support is generally considered knowledgeable and helpful, but a few users reported slow response times and difficulty navigating the support process. Mimecast's customer service elicits varied opinions, with some customers expressing satisfaction with its responsiveness and effectiveness, while others perceive it as unsatisfactory.
Ease of Deployment: Cisco Secure Email is generally straightforward and seamless to set up. It provides a modular and adaptable environment, but new users may need training. Users had mixed experiences with Mimecast Email Security's setup. Some users found it fast and uncomplicated, while others found it moderately complex.
Pricing: Opinions on the pricing of Cisco Secure Email are mixed. Some find it expensive but worth the investment, while others find it reasonably priced and competitive with other vendors. Mimecast Email Security is generally seen as costly, and some users struggle to justify the expense. It’s perceived as more expensive than competing solutions.
ROI: Cisco Secure Email's return on investment is influenced by factors such as use case, organization size, and industry. It is challenging to measure the return on investment for Mimecast Email Security.
Comparison Results: Cisco Secure Email is highly regarded for its intelligence threat detection, reputation filtering, and robust tracking abilities. The solution’s areas for improvement include data loss prevention and third-party integration. Mimecast is commended for its archiving and targeted threat protection capabilities. On the other hand, Mimecast faces challenges with its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and high pricing.
"It also gives the vulnerability status according to the versions you have selected. Let's say you have Google Chrome. It mentions the versions it has, and it updates. Within two hours of an update, it is reflected in the dashboard. That's really nice to have."
"I would say that 90% of the spam and phishing attack emails get blocked right off the bat."
"The technical support is good and quick to resolve issues."
"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."
"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."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The most valuable feature is protection against malicious links, fishing, and impersonation. You can train people to be aware of these threats, but they're not always careful. When they're using their phones between meetings, they click on a link, and it's game over."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"It provides good IT assistance."
"Cisco Secure Email has strong inbound services."
"This solution provides some benefits, like comfortable access to TAC support. You get prompt support when working directly with Cisco."
"It has an intuitive, clear graphical interface where you can deploy your policies and understand the overall flow. There are a lot of things that you cannot handle on the graphic interface, like message filters. For this, you need to go to a lower level where you have more power, like command line interface. So, this solution has the best of both worlds. There are not a lot of bells and whistles. It is more practical with access to most features that you can configure."
"The system provides our service desk with the means to troubleshoot email delivery issues with ease."
"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."
"The security features are valuable."
"The advanced phishing protection and the integration with the awareness tool that Cisco has embedded into the solution to bring awareness to the customers about the dangers of phishing attacks and other things that come from email are the most valuable features."
"The interface of this solution is very easy to navigate and user-friendly. There is no delivery in email and other communications, making it reliable. The configuration is relatively easy."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"It's good, it keeps the spam out."
"The solution offers good technical support."
"The product is good. To date, we have not faced any challenges."
"The solution's performance is good."
"The piece that is most valuable from the Mimecast standpoint will be the sandboxing feature."
"It does a good job for us, and its admin console is easy to use."
"The UI needs to be more user-friendly."
"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."
"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."
"This product's effectiveness could be improved, in terms of detecting unwanted spam or even malware between the emails, compared to other products."
"Several simulation options are available within 365, and the phishing simulation could be better."
"Too many false positives and lacks an accurate capability to detect malicious SharePoint sites."
"One area for improvement is support, in terms of being able to reach them and, especially, technical support for configuration."
"I'd like some additional features any product can give me to protect our environment in a better way."
"There are some concerns in the way the architecture is set up, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The user interface needs some improvement to become more user-friendly. The graphics could be better. It's designed more for a technical user rather than a business user."
"They can do it better with web links, with the URLs. They have a technology called Outbreak but it doesn't work as well as we would like."
"The Forged Email Detection feature needs improvement, particularly with domain. The sensors are not that good and the rules sets are unclear."
"The interface is dated. It has looked pretty much the same for 15 years or so. It would be helpful to be able to do everything from one spot. The centralized quarantine and reporting are completely separate from policy administration."
"The user interface could be updated."
"While Cisco offers excellent solutions and innovations, the pricing may not be suitable for everyone. The cost of the software is relatively high. In the current market, there are numerous competitive alternatives that focus on security, enterprise networks, and various other aspects. Cisco, being a comprehensive provider, extends its expertise across data, servers, storage, and security, making them a preferred choice for many enterprises. However, when it comes specifically to security solutions, there are other vendors that specialize solely in this domain, offering competitive options."
"The scalability must be improved."
"The solution is complex and not easy to use."
"The filtering needs more flexibility."
"I'd like to have better support from the product in the future."
"While it's quick and easy, the initial setup could be more user-friendly."
"Many of our users complain that the system is blocking too many attachments. It's a good practice from a security perspective, but our users think Mimecast is doing too much. It might be something we'll have to adjust."
"The detection rates are an area for improvement."
"The solution should include more AI features instead of Mimecast's more general static configuration tooling."
"The attachment scanning feature doesn't work properly."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 2nd in Email Security with 55 reviews while Mimecast Email Security is ranked 5th in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 23 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4, while Mimecast Email Security 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 Mimecast Email Security writes "It gives clients peace of mind and helps them educate their users about threats". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Trellix Collaboration Security, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Fortinet FortiMail, Proofpoint Email Protection and IRONSCALES, whereas Mimecast Email Security is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Abnormal Security, Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, Fortinet FortiMail and Avanan. See our Cisco Secure Email 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.