Share your experience using Vade for M365

I have about three years of experience with Proofpoint products.

I gained experience with this product while working in the retail industry.

We deploy it in the cloud.

I deal primarily with Proofpoint Email Protection, which is the main focus of Proofpoint's offerings.

Mail security works in conjunction with firewalling for email and DMARC compliance, and there are various authentications involved.

Proofpoint Email Protection is focused on email protection and is the key product.

With Proofpoint Email Protection, I appreciate that it's the industry leader, and its firewalling is very easy to manage and implement. It's also very less noisy.

I believe they still need to improve by consolidating some portals, as currently, you have to log in separately to a few of them.

I have about three years of experience with Proofpoint products.

During outages, I don't see much of an issue, as they let us know, and I personally don't experience many outages.

It is very less noisy, and if we need support, it is also much better compared to other vendors.

I would rate the support a nine or ten.

I am familiar with the granular policy control feature of Proofpoint Email Protection, and I find their support excellent for modifying those policies.

Positive

I do not have experience with Microsoft Purview products, but I know some Proofpoint products.

I apologize, I do not have experience with the Purview one, but I do know the Proofpoint products.

I'm not sure about the features of the Purview one.

Compared to other products, Proofpoint's real-time threat intelligence makes it less noisy. They collect and share threat information effectively, which benefits all customers.

I have seen a lot of improvements in Proofpoint's reporting and analytics compared to earlier days.

As a leader in the market, I find the pricing for Proofpoint Email Protection is a little high.

Their licensing models vary, and even the premium model adequately supports awareness campaigning, so I find it acceptable.

Normally, they sell their products through resellers, not directly through AWS Marketplace.

For us, we are clients of Proofpoint.

I rate Proofpoint Email Protection a nine out of ten.

My use case for Mimecast Email Security is that it's one of the best solutions for a traditional gateway. Check Point is the best for the AI-based solution. We are selling both as a partner for both solutions to customers.

Mimecast Email Security includes the best gateway solution across all Cisco, Trend Micro, and other solutions. For customers who want a traditional gateway, we suggest using Mimecast Email Security. For customers who want the advanced solution, we suggest Check Point for those features.

Mimecast Email Security's anti-phishing features are good and perform as expected.

Mimecast Email Security is a good solution because our customers haven't reported any phishing emails being delivered. It performs effectively as a traditional gateway solution. We haven't received any complaints regarding this solution.

Mimecast Email Security can be improved by adding some API integrations. Instead of remaining a traditional gateway, Mimecast Email Security needs to provide API solutions similar to Check Point.

I have been working with Mimecast Email Security for almost two years.

The system is not user-friendly because you have to create policies that are mapped in a dictionary. As an IT engineer, I understand how it works, but explaining it to another IT person can be difficult. Having more user-friendly dashboards would improve the work experience. In Mimecast Email Security, checking policies in the dictionary or gateway is very complicated, and not everyone understands this process.

If you examine the Check Point portal, it's user-friendly with easily accessible tabs that anyone can explore. With Mimecast Email Security, making changes might impact existing mailboxes. The portal is complicated compared to Check Point's user-friendly interface.

Mimecast Email Security is a stable solution. We don't encounter many issues with it. Customers report issues rarely, once or twice a month at most. It's performing well, and customers aren't reporting significant problems after implementation. They confirm it's a good solution where only one or two rare emails get through, while the rest are properly blocked without any issues.

Mimecast Email Security is a scalable solution. If Mimecast Email Security introduces API solutions, it will dominate the market. This would also be beneficial for Check Point.

I would rate my experience with technical support of Mimecast Email Security between seven and eight out of ten for their support.

Positive

The initial setup of Mimecast Email Security was easy, though it's not user-friendly.

My relationship with Mimecast Email Security is as a partner.

I am not familiar with the pricing details of Mimecast Email Security as I am an engineer. The sales team manages all pricing-related matters.

Most customers are using Mimecast Email Security in the cloud only, not on-premises.

Mimecast Email Security has a high catch rate compared to other solutions such as Cisco, Trend Micro, or Barracuda. They consistently implement new solutions and inform all their customers and partners about new features, which is a positive aspect.

Based on overall experience, Mimecast Email Security is the best solution for traditional gateways. Having worked with multiple traditional gateways including Cisco, Trend Micro, and Barracuda, Mimecast Email Security stands out as the superior option.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Mimecast Email Security a 10 overall.