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."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 product is not resource-intensive."
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"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."
"Does a thorough job of examining email and URLs for malicious content."
"The good part is that you don't have to configure it, which is very convenient."
"I love the Advanced Malware Protection feature. It works very well... The appliance has more security such as SDF, DKIM, DMARC, and encryption."
"The most significant enhancement we've gained is in terms of security through the upgrade we received."
"The tool comes with AI features. It is good for clients who already use Cisco products due to integration."
"The filtering is definitely better at catching both spam and malicious messages, and there's a lot of extremely granular ability for setting up rules. You can do it the way you want to. The Microsoft solution tends to be pretty limited in how it allows some of that to be done."
"The strong point of the solution is that we hardly get any spam emails because of Cisco Secure Email."
"Initially, the most valuable feature for us was the SenderBase Reputation, because that reduced the number of emails that were even considered by the system by a huge number..."
"It blocks bulk marketing messages, graymail, spam, and provides advanced malware protection."
"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."
"The customization and control of URL filtering and the integration with other Forcepoint solutions are great features."
"The initial setup is easy. It's not difficult."
"This is a highly detailed product with very good key features."
"Real-time category protection."
"Most valuable features are content filtering and monitoring."
"Reporting and automatic updates of website categorization."
"The solution’s administration is easy."
"It's stable and reliable."
"There's room for improvement regarding the time frame for retrieving emails."
"We need to be able to whitelist data at the backend."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"Too many false positives and lacks an accurate capability to detect malicious SharePoint sites."
"The visibility for the weaknesses in the system and unauthorized access can be improved."
"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."
"I'd like some additional features any product can give me to protect our environment in a better way."
"One area for improvement is support, in terms of being able to reach them and, especially, technical support for configuration."
"There are some concerns in the way the architecture is set up, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The hardware is not up to the mark. Two to three times a year we have complete downtime."
"The configuration UI should be made more intuitive. Currently, it takes a while to understand how to do the basic configurations."
"We would like to see more options for the customization of content filters."
"We have been struggling in the last month with Cisco encryption and with the S/MIME encryption. I don't know if it is an issue on our side or if these features of the solution are not working very well."
"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."
"It would be nice to have an easier way to check on the health of the system, how stressed these appliances are. Sure, you can do it, but it would be helpful to have an easier way to do it, maybe even at a glance."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved."
"There should be more hardware models available and the application control could improve."
"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."
"It has a problem with tablets and the iPhone. It's not filtering on these platforms. It filters on Windows but not iOS or Android."
"The deployment is a bit complex and it requires expertise to deploy, which is something that should be improved and made easier to do."
"A feature we wish to see addressed in the next release of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway involves its administration."
"Ease of use could be improved."
"The product needs to have more mobility."
"But the deployment could be easier. It might take from one day to three days. Usually, that involves an engineer from the vendor and a working team at the enterprise."
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 55 reviews while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 6th 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 Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Trellix Collaboration Security, 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.