Ray LaCasseEmail Adminstrator at Merchants Capital Resources, Inc.
Anonymous UserHead Of Finance And Administration at a financial services firm
Nizar RadadHead of IT Department at Qcon
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"Because we scan products, and there is a lot of critical data, security is very important in these cases."
"It sends us reports, where we can see if there have been attacks, e.g. DDoS. If so, we can switch to a clean IP."
"It integrates with Active Directory and we can limit specific users to using specific applications."
"I can customize the configuration and policies."
"It blocks bulk marketing messages, graymail, spam, and provides advanced malware protection."
"The most valuable features are protection against ransomware and spam."
"The user interface was quite friendly, it was quite easy to use, unlike some other Cisco products. Anybody could use it. You don't have to be familiar with IT to be able to handle navigating it."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to remove bad messages that were delivered, prior to being classified as unwanted."
"The anti-spam features are excellent on the email firewalls."
"The initial implementation is pretty easy to handle."
"They have customized security rules, mature rules, anti-virus protection, as well as email authentication similar to SPF, DKIM, and DMARC."
"Its anti-phishing functionality is the most valuable. Certainly, the biggest problem I have is phishing."
"The most valuable features are the business email compromise protection and targeted attack prevention."
"The solution scales quite well."
"I like all the features with Proofpoint, such as how it filters the spam and marketing mail, lost reality mail, blocks phishing attacks, blocks malicious attachments, and stops phishing links. Also it can defend against the business email compromise impersonation technique. It is a complete solution for all email attacks. It filters for the bad, malicious attachments. If there is any executable file, it can be deleted. It is a good, complete solution."
"I would like them to add some clustering or high availability features."
"The initial setup was complex because I have two sites with physical clusters."
"The hardware is not up to the mark. Two to three times a year we have complete downtime."
"The graphical user interface is not user-friendly like other vendors. I find it very difficult at times to find some options on the UI."
"I would like to see sandboxing for email, where suspicious emails received by the system are analyzed through online services."
"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."
"We didn't get any malware, but a few phishing emails, maybe one or two, slipped in."
"One of the things that Cisco could improve on with IronPort is the support. Cisco doesn't really have enough engineers who have full, hands-on knowledge of IronPort. Knowledge of it is not something you can find easily compared to other security appliances."
"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."
"Proofpoint should have better integration with complex environments that need more than one instance of Proofpoint, as there are issues with nested instances."
"The solution could be improved with the addition of PLP and email encryption features."
"We find the cost to be prohibitive."
"They do not have an on-demand scan for the internal viruses and internal users, and they don't have a scan for the exchange server against viruses and spam as Symantec does."
"It has too many screens. It is kind of a conglomeration of products. In other words, they built product A, product B, and product C, and they are yet to integrate them into a single administrative console. I would certainly like to see a more seamless administrative interface. I would also like to see them include more bang for the buck, by including features like email fraud protection, rather than making their product so piecemeal, where you are buying little pieces. I agree with the idea of having multiple tiers or layers, but maybe as small, medium, and large, as opposed to an a la carte menu."
"The largest complaint that we hear from our customers is that there is no local support."
"The incident reporting on offer needs to be improved. It's lacking right now. It should be on the platform somewhere."
"The reporting section could be enhanced. I like some reports but if they could allow us to create custom reports with more flexibility it would enhance the reports more."
"We do annual licensing for Cisco Secure Email Gatewayand SMA together, and possibly SmartNet support. Packaged together, the cost is just under $38,000."
"In addition to the standard licensing, there is a cost for SMARTnet as well."
"Pricing depends on your environment and which model you want to buy."
"Licensing costs depend on how many users there are. It could range between $5 and $7 per month, per user."
"The license was not per user, the license model was per feature. You could choose anti-virus, anti-spam, etc. It was feature-based and charged yearly."
"There were no other costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"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."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The licensing costs are per-user for the product that you get with them."
"Annually, it costs us about $92,000. This is pretty much what it costs us. There is no additional cost."
"The price is reasonable."
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.
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.
Proofpoint Email Protection stops malware and non-malware threats such as impostor email (also known as email fraud). Deployed as a cloud service or on-premises, it provides granular filtering to control bulk "graymail" and other unwanted email. And business continuity capabilities keep email communications flowing, even when your email server fails.
Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is ranked 9th in Email Security with 3 reviews while Proofpoint Email Protection is ranked 3rd in Email Security with 8 reviews. Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is rated 8.4, while Proofpoint Email Protection is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection writes "Protects your organization from all types of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Proofpoint Email Protection writes "I previously used Symantec and switched because the quality of support, stability, and accuracy went down". Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Fortinet FortiMail, Barracuda Essentials, Agari and IRONSCALES, whereas Proofpoint Email Protection is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, Fortinet FortiMail, FireEye Network Security and Agari. See our Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection vs. Proofpoint Email Protection 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.