We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] and Proofpoint Email Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."Defender enables us to secure all 365-related activity from a single place. It gives us visibility into everything happening in Outlook, protecting us against phishing and other email-based threats. Defender helps us detect any suspicious behaviors."
"The product is not resource-intensive."
"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."
"The email protection is excellent, especially in terms of anti-phishing policies."
"The good part is that you don't have to configure it, which is very convenient."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365's most valuable features are safe attachments and safe links."
"The Forcepoint Email Security roadmap easily integrates with the data loss prevention (DLP) suite of Forcepoint. Therefore, the customer doesn't have to buy another solution for DLP."
"Unlike other competitors, it doesn't cause any performance issues."
"The feature I find most valuable is the web, email and DLP integration."
"It is good at data leakage prevention (DLP). You can create the data exfiltration profile while sending the emails, which is one of the key advantages of the solution."
"I like how versatile the options are. For example, we can set it where we are able to access and browse Facebook but we are denied the ability to post photos. There is also that ability integrate with Office 365 - SharePoint app."
"Using Forcepoint, we have created policies and rules for any suspicious mail. It is blocked and only released by an admin's approval."
"It's easier to deploy than other options."
"Forcepoint Email Security is a good solution, and I don't have any issues with it. I found anti-spam and anti-spyware the most valuable features of Forcepoint Email Security."
"The solution scales quite well."
"Its main defense is to stop malicious emails from coming through. There is a sandbox environment where you can open malicious or suspicious emails to make sure that they're not malicious, instead of taking the risk of having your employees do it. This is definitely something that everybody needs nowadays, especially with the rise in cyber attacks."
"The solution blocks malicious emails containing viruses and malware and reduces them out of spam."
"Proofpoint Email Protection offers an additional layer of protection compared to other brands like Microsoft, Mimecast, and Barracuda. While these major companies excel at detecting malicious attachments, the solution goes further by analyzing the context of emails, allowing for more nuanced decision-making."
"Its anti-phishing functionality is the most valuable. Certainly, the biggest problem I have is phishing."
"Proofpoint is the main tool for blocking spam because it denies the connection altogether."
"The most valuable feature is the option to edit the inbound security."
"They have customized security rules, mature rules, anti-virus protection, as well as email authentication similar to SPF, DKIM, and DMARC."
"In one of the reports I can get the exact place where a vulnerable file resides. But for that, I need to explicitly go into the device and check. If they could include that file part in the report, without my having to go to the device itself, that would help."
"We need a separate license and we don't know how to get the license that is required."
"Configuration requires going to a lot of places rather than just accessing one tab."
"The custom alerts have to improve a lot."
"We noticed that from time to time, Microsoft's stability does have problems. Sometimes the service goes up and down. Sometimes they change without prior notice."
"Microsoft wants its well-paying customers to finish testing some of its half-baked products, find bugs, and report bugs back to Microsoft's team, which is a little frustrating for those who have to manage it and roll it up to thousands of people across the organization."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 could improve by giving customers information on techniques to prevent threats. For example, information about best practices on how to protect their own devices against hackers and scammers, such as educational information or training. This would help others have a better understanding of cyber security. Additionally, there can be more security features added."
"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."
"I would like for deployment to be simplified."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved, as it is not customizable."
"The pricing could always be just a little bit better."
"The solution could use better integration capabilities."
"This solution could be improved by providing further functionality to reduce or to block ransom attacks, cross-site scripting and man-in-the-middle attacks."
"Forcepoint Email Security is stable, but it could be improved."
"Technical support is lacking. It could be a lot better."
"Forcepoint is the best for DLP, but it is not better than other solutions in terms of phishing emails or threat protections on the email. It has less visibility over there. They might need to enhance these components because other solutions, such as Cisco Email Security and IronPort, have more advanced features. Forcepoint should focus more on threats and spam. They have a small database for spam. They must increase their solution's capability from this perspective."
"It's scalable, but the devil's in the details — you have to know your email volumes."
"The product's deployment is complex and requires technical knowledge."
"Proofpoint Email Protection could improve the Mail Trace feature and make navigation easier."
"Proofpoint should have better integration with complex environments that need more than one instance of Proofpoint, as there are issues with nested instances."
"The largest complaint that we hear from our customers is that there is no local support."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Proofpoint Email Protection could improve by allowing more customization of the reports, such as exceptions and black-and-white lists."
"The accessibility of Proofpoint Email Protection, particularly access to product trials, could be improved. It's hard to get a trial for Proofpoint Email Protection, and many customers prefer not just to do the POC or demo but try the product out."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Email Security with 14 reviews while Proofpoint Email Protection is ranked 1st in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 44 reviews. Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] is rated 7.8, while Proofpoint Email Protection is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] writes "Easy to use and setup and expands well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Proofpoint Email Protection writes "A reasonably priced product that offers protection to emails, along with spam filters". Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Proofpoint Email Protection is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Cisco Secure Email, Fortinet FortiMail and KnowBe4.
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.