Mimecast Email Security Reviews

We use Mimecast as our email gateway. We also use it as our archival service. All those phishing, anti-phishing, spear phishing, spamming, and other security filters that they have, we use all of them.

We have found email security very good.

The gateway is excellent. 

We have found the archival services to be very valuable.

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 initial setup is straightforward.

It was not so much about the product itself, however, their business model needs 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. This is something which really worries us as a company.

I've used the solution for about six years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very good.

The solution can scale well. If a company needs to expand, it can do so rather easily.

We have grown from about 2,600 users to about 4,000 users. We have added additional geography as well. The product is resilient enough to take care of all of this.

We have contracts and we are also subscribed to a service plan. Whenever we have used it, the service levels have been very good and we have no reason to complain.

We were previously thinking of an alternative to Mimecast for two reasons. The main reason is as an organization, we are in the financial service industry, and we have to show some data resiliency to our regulators. However, due to the fact that we're present in 30 countries, what happens is all Mimecast data is centrally hosted in one particular grid, which is preventing us from showing data resiliency to them. I want a solution that allows me to selectively map users to a particular geography. 

We didn't find the initial implementation complex. It was pretty easy and rather straightforward.  We didn't run into trouble.

We are a complex organization. We are present in 30 countries. It was a mix of on-prem and some were in Office 365. Due to the set up of our own architecture, we had to undergo some labor, however, otherwise, the entire process was pretty straightforward.

We typically use a subscription service. If there are version upgrades. We automatically get upgraded to the latest version, as it's a software as a service setup. We don't need to update it as Mimecast takes care of it.

If you need to extract data from their archival service, there is an additional fee involved.

As we are an enterprise customer and we have a relationship with them, what we are told by the reseller is that we pay about 40% of their list price for this product.

It's an expensive solution. There are other competitors, like Barracuda, who offer similar services. We believe that over the years, they have picked up, and their pricing is much more competitive than Mimecast. As an organization, Microsoft itself has really matured over the years. They offer probably 90% of what Mimecast is offering, and then you don't have to pay anything extra for it because it comes with part of the Office 365 licenses. That is why we also believe that there is a lot of room for Mimecast to get their act together, pricing-wise.

We evaluated a few other options such as Cisco IronPort as a security service. We evaluated Proofpoint. The comprehensive solution that Mimecast offers, however, really made us sign on the dotted line.

We're just an end-user.

We use their Perimeter Defense plan, we use their Continuity plan, we also use email to archive. These are the three scales that we use from them.

I would advise others considering the solution to technically evaluate their competencies, their highs, and lows, first. Also, read the fine print, and understand the exact costs. A company will need to understand natively how much of Mimecast capabilities does Microsoft offer if you just subscribe to an Office 365 license. It might make them rethink using this solution.

From a technical standpoint, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's very stable. 

We find the product to be scalable. 

The solution offers good technical support.

The price is reasonable. 

The installation is not so straightforward. In comparison, for example, Proofpoint or Defender offer easier installations when you integrate with Active Directory.

I started using the solution five years ago. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We can scale the solution as needed. 

Technical support is good. We are happy with the level of support on offer. 

Positive

I've used Defender, Proofpoint, and Mimecast. 

Some companies are using Defender, some companies are using Proofpoint, and some are using Mimecast.

In my company, we are using Defender.

Mimecast and Microsoft Office 365 is better than Proofpoint for the mail filter rules only. The mail filter rules in Proofpoint are not the best.

The solution is not straightforward to set up. The integration can be a bit harder than when compared to other solutions. That said, it's not so hard it's impossible. 

I'd rate the initial setup a four out of five in terms of complexity.

There are three types of licenses, however, I don't know the exact pricing or differences. My understanding is that it is not overly expensive, as my clients have used it for years and they would have left if it was costly.

I'm a freelancer and working support for some companies who are using Mimecast and Proofpoint. Sometimes I create it as a subscription for them, and I configure everything from the scratch, and sometimes, I take it already configured and just maintain it and tune the settings in.

I'd advise those implementing the solution to read the documentation carefully before beginning. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd rate them higher, however, they are difficult to set up with Active Directory.

We use Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection for email security.

What I like about the integration is that it is directly into Microsoft 365, users can use their Microsoft 365 credentials to log into the portal and access their mail.

It does have integrations, and there is an app that can be added to Outlook to allow them to do what they need to do. 

While some of the setups are probably not as user-friendly as some of the other platforms, there is a lot of customization that you can do to the platform to help you pull up a lot of stuff that shouldn't be going into users' mailboxes.

I believe the world is going through a crazy period right now, and everyone is attempting to penetrate different systems as quickly as possible and change their ways of doing things. 

I have always found Mimecast to be very responsive; for example, if we see something come through, they address it and it helps to sort out the issues. Overall, I'm pleased with them. I think I just look at what's out there every year during renewal time to see if we're still on the best platform or if we should consider migrating to something else.

It has great reporting, and we can see what's going on.

I am pleased with the features we have at the moment and everything it does; it's only one piece of the puzzle for our environment, but I'm pleased with how it detects things and some of the functionality that we have had to set up due to the complexity of our business and security. I'm pleased with everything. I don't have anything specific in mind that I'd be looking for.

While it's quick and easy, the initial setup could be more user-friendly.

I have been working with Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection for two or three years.

I did not have any issues with the stability of Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection.

Maybe once in the last year, but it was a short period of time. Everything comes through. The capabilities during the impersonation protection, integrating with some of our various partners, and so on so that we can work seamlessly with them as well. Overall, I found it very easy to work with them.

Technical support is good. I haven't had any problems with technical support.

Obviously, there is a paid add-on depending on the level of support you require, but they are extremely responsive. Whenever I call in, they usually resolve my issue right away, we'll go over it and give me a callback. It's not like I'm waiting weeks or months for a response. So far, so good.

To be honest, the initial setup was very quick and easy. I had a quick turnaround because I was transitioning away from another company we were using called AppRiver and their SecureTide product, which was okay but not my favorite. I didn't like the integrations and other procedures we had to go through, and the Mimecast product seemed to fit better in comparison.

There is a lot of functionality that we haven't fully taken advantage of. 

I would say, make sure you are selecting a product that best fits your business.

Some things will be added as you go through the implementation process. Since our implementation, items have been added, and with some of the functionality that they have, we simply don't have the time to assess and determine what we require.

I would recommend reviewing everything that comes with your product license and ensuring that it is covered when you go through the implementation process.

I would rate Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for email security.

Email security is the most valuable feature of the solution.

The solution should include more AI features instead of Mimecast's more general static configuration tooling.

I have been using Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection for two years.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

The solution was deployed by a vendor for us.

Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is a well-known solution that was recommended to us by a third party.

I wouldn't say Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is the best tool out there, but it's okay. I would advise potential users to try out its alternatives as well.

Overall, I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten.

The solution's performance is good.

The solution is complex and not easy to use.

I have to continuously manage the tech in a different space with the solution. I've got to manage different types of rules separately.

I have been working with Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection for three years.

The solution’s technical support is very good.

Positive

The solution's initial setup requires a bit of additional consultancy. Mimecast manages things differently, and they have a country-based support framework. Since we have multinational customers and have instances in the UK and Australia, we've got to work through different support sectors.

Mimecast could simplify the solution and include a central console like the one Microsoft has.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is our spam filter, phishing filter, and executive impersonation filter. We have its latest version.

It does a good job for us, and its admin console is easy to use.

Their support should be improved. They are notorious for sending you to knowledge-based articles rather than actually talking to you, but that is, unfortunately, kind of becoming a trend with everything.

In terms of features, I haven't had any complaints. However, I don't like the fact they moved to a paid training subscription model. They used to have a lot of free webinars for training, but they have started to charge for them in the past year.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is stable. We didn't have any issues.

It is scalable. It is used across our entire enterprise. We probably have about 175 people, and they range from our CEO to all the way down to our warehouse people.

They always send you a link to an article rather than call you and talk to you about the problem you're reporting.

It was pretty complex. 

We had a third party do the setup for us.

We looked at Microsoft, Proofpoint, and Mimecast.

I would advise others to take a good look at it. There are a lot of layers to it, and there are parts of Mimecast that we don't even use yet. It is pretty much a beast when it comes to email security, but just make sure you take your time and have somebody who knows how to set it up. Give enough training to your admin. I manage several different pieces, and Mimecast is one of them. It is just an ongoing thing that requires monitoring all day and looking for phishing, impersonations, and things like that. You also have to set up different policies as they come about for block centers and permitted centers. It is almost a full-time job.

I would rate Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection an eight out of ten. I don't really have any complaints, and it does its job. 

We use the solution for its security and archiving facilities.

The solution's most valuable features are identity protection and sandboxing.

They should make the solution's identity protection feature even better. Also, its default policies need improvement. In addition, they should improve the cookies management feature as well.

We have been using the solution for four or five years.

The solution is very stable, and I rate it as a nine.

The solution is scalable. We can add domains very quickly, but we do face issues once in a while. I rate its scalability as a nine.

The solution's technical support is quite good.

Positive

The solution's initial setup is moderately complex. It needs improvement overall. The installation takes a few hours to complete. It involves enabling features and following the required steps. I rate the process as a seven.

The solution's cost is reasonable as customers can choose the packages based on their requirements. I rate it as a seven for pricing.

The solution is simple to use; I rate it an eight. I suggest others compare it with AT&T as well.

We primarily use the solution for filtering. 

The dashboard is very nice. 

It offers an easy initial setup. 

The solution has been stable. 

We can scale the product. 

Technical support is helpful.

The solution is very expensive. 

I've used the solution for a couple of years. Maybe four or five.

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

This is s scalable product. If you want to expand it, you can. 

We have 100 people on the solution at this point. The users vary. Different departments use it. 

We are satisfied with the technical support. We find them to be responsive. 

Positive

We did previously use a different solution. It might have been Check Point. Once we saw the demo, we felt this solution would be a better fit, so we switched. 

The solution is very simple to set up. It's not overly complex or difficult. The deployment only takes a couple of days. 

One person can handle any maintenance requirements as needed. 

We had a third-party assist us with the initial setup process. We did not handle it completely by ourselves. 

The solution is quite pricy. We find it to be costly. 

I'm a customer and end-user.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.