We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Email and McAfee Web Protection [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."The product's scalability is good."
"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."
"Safe attachments, safe links, policies, and the ability to protect from zero-day threats are the most valuable features."
"Defender is a SaaS platform, so it offers more flexibility. Managing the permissions is easier. The solution's automated detection and response features are scalable."
"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."
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"The good part is that you don't have to configure it, which is very convenient."
"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 strong point of the solution is that we hardly get any spam emails because of Cisco Secure Email."
"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."
"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 tool comes with AI features. It is good for clients who already use Cisco products due to integration."
"Administration of the email domains and custom filters are easily done via the web interface."
"The solution works well."
"It's a bit easy to handle Cisco Secure Email; it's not that difficult. For the logs, which are in PDF format, it's not hard to read them. We don't need Wireshark much to analyze the logs."
"The system provides our service desk with the means to troubleshoot email delivery issues with ease."
"The solution does what it's meant to do."
"The most valuable feature is the ease in the configuration for security roles."
"It doesn't seem to take too much system bandwidth, and I also like its reporting. Once a month, it gives me a reminder of the activity. It reminds me that the protection is on, and if there are any issues, it summarizes those minor issues. During the month, it only notifies when there is something special."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"It has dependable anti-malware and intrusion prevention features all-in-one package."
"McAfee Web Protection was a good tool because in the olden days when you had to use a proxy tool when browsing the internet. Today the logic has changed slightly, in the sense your protection's taken onto the cloud. You'll exit a predefined gateway on the cloud before your internet browsing happens and therefore you're secured."
"It is functional. It has reduced risk and downtime while also ensuring regulatory compliance, which is critical."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"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."
"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."
"The only thing they should improve is the licensing model. They should stop changing it. A year ago, the five features I mentioned were included in one product. Now, three of them are bundled into one product, and you have to pay extra for the other two. I don't mind paying extra, but I don't want them to change it every year or every six months. I need to know what I'm looking at and not worry about it next year."
"You should be able to deploy Defender for every subscription without the need to add servers."
"We need a separate license and we don't know how to get the license that is required."
"The visibility for the weaknesses in the system and unauthorized access can be improved."
"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."
"Cisco Secure Email can be improved from the administrator's point of view. Usually, you have to work with different areas, and they can try to make it easy for the administrator to use different functions."
"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 could be updated."
"Cisco Email Secure's pricing needs to be less. We have vendors who provide cheaper solutions with the same features."
"Typically, in a phishing email, they try to use a name everybody's going to recognize, like the CEO's name or the CFO's name... With this appliance, the way it's designed at the moment, for us to really stop that with any level of confidence, we have to build a dictionary of all the names of the people we want it to check, and all the ways they could be spelled. My name would be in there as Phillip Collins, Phillip D. Collins, Phillip Dean Collins, Phil Collins, Phil D. Collins. There could be eight or 10 variations of my name that we'd have to put in the dictionary. There's no artificial intelligence to say "Phil Collins" could be all these other things, and to stop phishing from coming through in that way."
"We would like to see more options for the customization of content filters."
"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."
"We used a consultant to help us set it up. Unfortunately, he was not that good. They were out of McAfee people. He was a consultant and knew the product, but he was not a McAfee person. How they managed it and how they worked was not straightforward."
"We need a better customer experience and more flexibility in the product."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"The solution should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"Lacking filter for spam."
"The manufacturerers should have more transparancy about exactly what is getting filtered when you use the product and why."
"The initial setup could be simplified, there is a learning curve during the implementation."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 2nd in Email Security with 55 reviews while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Email Security with 16 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4, while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2. 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 McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". 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 McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access and Bitsight Third-Party Risk Management.
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.