Compare FireEye Email Security vs. Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about FireEye Email Security vs. Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection and other solutions. Updated: March 2021.
476,163 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"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.""It has the IMS engine, Intelligent Multi-Scan engine, and it does a good job, right out-of-the-box, of blocking the vast majority of things that should be blocked.""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...""The most valuable feature is the different content filters we are using, such as DKIM.""We like the in-built features, like the email filtering based on the IP and domain. Cisco has its own blacklisted domains and IPs, which is very good. This filters around 70 percent of emails from spam, and we are seeing fewer false positives with this.""The most valuable features are Advanced Malware Protection, URL filtering, and of course Reputation Filtering.""It does a great job of preventing spam, malware, and ransomware. I can only go by what people have told me and what I've seen, but I have not seen spam in a year and a half to two years in my own company mailbox. And there are not a lot of catches where it's catching something that should have gotten through, either.""It has the ability to tell us, after an email has been delivered, where else it went, once it got inside. Maybe it's something we wanted it to stop and it didn't stop it, but it notified us later that it was something that it should have stopped. It can give us a trajectory of all the other places that it went internally and it can tell us what files were transferred as well."

More Cisco Secure Email Pros »

"The solution's most valuable feature is its simplicity. It's very user-friendly.""The auto-remediation feature is valuable.""FireEye is good for malware depicting and security."

More FireEye Email Security Pros »

"The product is good. To date, we have not faced any challenges.""The piece that is most valuable from the Mimecast standpoint will be the sandboxing feature.""It's really quite user-friendly. In terms of technical superiority and the product itself, there are no complaints. It is really cutting edge."

More Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection Pros »

Cons
"They could improve the filters. In my time at the company, there were several times we had to contact support to update the 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 have occasionally had hardware problems because we are using an appliance-based solution, but that might change. We may consider going to virtual systems.""We would like to see more options for the customization of content filters.""The solution needs to improve its advanced phishing filters. It is very good at filtering things which have bad reputations. However, when phishing or malicious emails are new or coming from a legitimate source, we don't feel that the solution is working.""The reporting functionality needs to be improved.""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.""I would like more functionality and how to use it for Level 2 type staff. The biggest issue is it needs to be easier to use and navigate."

More Cisco Secure Email Cons »

"The reporting aspect of the solution needs improvement.""The spam detection feature could be better.""If they want to be the primary or best solution, they need to have better email management features."

More FireEye Email Security Cons »

"The price could be better, it should be reduced.""The detection rates are an area for improvement.""We have subscribed to an archival service, and yet, when we have to get our data out, we have to pay a fee to get our own data. They charge an extraction fee."

More Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"We were using Proofpoint and then we switched to Cisco... reportability was one of the main reasons we switched, but the biggest one was cost. If you can get an equivalent functionality for a better price it's wise to do so. That's what our primary decision came down to: We could get equivalent functionality at a lower price point.""It is not that costly. We pay for the solution through a contractor and pay an annual fee.""You're going to get what you pay for. If you're not willing to pay the price of Cisco, you're not going to get a product that's as good as Cisco. I don't think Cisco is overpriced, because for the last two years I've been comparing it to Microsoft and Cisco has been cheaper and given us more features.""In my previous organization, avoiding four instances of CryptoLocker within an estimated six month period is approximately $600,000 in lost time and effort. Our five year cost was about a million dollars, and the four outages that we had equated to 65 percent of that five year cost.""The licensing was all transferred.""Compared to Cisco's on-prem service, the cost is the same, but you don't have to pay for the hardware and you don't have to maintain the system, as far as upgrades and hardware failures are concerned. It is cheaper to operate on their cloud service than it is to operate with their on-prem service.""Cisco Secure Email and the support are priced well. It's not cheap, but there are other solutions that offer less and cost so much. For example, Microsoft is more expensive than Cisco."

More Cisco Secure Email Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
"It's an expensive solution.""The licensing costs are per-user for the product that you get with them."

More Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Email Security solutions are best for your needs.
476,163 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: I love the Advanced Malware Protection feature. It works very well... The appliance has more security such as SDF, DKIM… more »
Top Answer: The licensing was all transferred. A fair amount of the configuration had to be done by hand. We didn't transfer the… more »
Top Answer: 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… more »
Top Answer: FireEye is good for malware depicting and security.
Top Answer: If they want to be as primary or best solution, they need to have better email management features. SMTP handling is… more »
Top Answer: I used the solution as a secondary security assessment gateway.
Top Answer: It's really quite user-friendly. In terms of technical superiority and the product itself, there are no complaints. It… more »
Top Answer: We typically use a subscription service. If there are version upgrades. We automatically get upgraded to the latest… more »
Top Answer: It was not so much about the product itself, however, their business model needs improvement. We have subscribed to an… more »
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco Email Security, IronPort, Cisco Email Security, ESA, Email Security Appliances
Learn More
Overview

Customers of all sizes face the same daunting challenge: email is simultaneously the most important business communication tool and the leading attack vector for security breaches. Cisco Email Security enables users to communicate securely and helps organizations combat Business Email Compromise (BEC), ransomware, advanced malware, phishing, spam, and data loss with a multilayered approach to security.

FireEye Email Security delivers dynamic defense to detect attacks from the very first time they're seen and blocks the most dangerous cyber threats including malware-laden attachments and URLs, credential phishing sites and business email compromise attacks. Email-borne cyber attacks are targeted, automated and hidden amongst millions of messages, easily morphing before signatures can be created.

Mimecast’s Advanced Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection uses multiple, sophisticated, detection engines and a diverse set of threat intelligence sources to protect email from spam, malware, phishing, and targeted attacks delivered as a 100% cloud-based service.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Email
Learn more about FireEye Email Security
Learn more about Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection
Sample Customers
SUNY Old Westbury, CoxHealth, City of Fullerton, Indra
Northshore Utility District, Luz Technologies, Air Academy Federal Credit Union, Bank Gutmann, Bank of Thailand, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, State of Missouri, City and County of San Francisco, Denver Public Schools, Vodafone, Go Auto, Stater Bros. Market
Azizi Developments, Affinity Credit Union, Aftercare, Al Abbar Group
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Energy/Utilities Company21%
Retailer16%
Manufacturing Company11%
Financial Services Firm11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider33%
Computer Software Company21%
Financial Services Firm5%
Government4%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company29%
Comms Service Provider24%
Government8%
Financial Services Firm6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company30%
Comms Service Provider15%
Insurance Company5%
Government4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise23%
Large Enterprise42%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise40%
Large Enterprise56%
No Data Available
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about FireEye Email Security vs. Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection and other solutions. Updated: March 2021.
476,163 professionals have used our research since 2012.

FireEye Email Security is ranked 12th in Email Security with 3 reviews while Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is ranked 9th in Email Security with 3 reviews. FireEye Email Security is rated 7.6, while Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of FireEye Email Security writes "Malware security exceptional, great complementary solution, and support knowledgeable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection writes "Protects your organization from all types of threats". FireEye Email Security is most compared with Forcepoint Email Security, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, Fortinet FortiMail, DMARC Compass and Barracuda Email Security Gateway, whereas Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Barracuda Essentials, Fortinet FortiMail, Agari and Forcepoint Email Security. See our FireEye Email Security vs. Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection report.

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.