Share your experience using Vade for M365

I work with Barracuda Email Protection as a customer. My major use case for using Barracuda Email Protection is at 100% because we get the whole thing, but unfortunately, it doesn't do backup for us on-premises. It only backs up wherever it's stored. We have that kind of problem, but nonetheless, so far we can keep it because we haven't been hacked. It's blocking all malware, trojans, and all these things. It's doing well for us. We haven't had any attack on Barracuda Email Protection's side.

Before Barracuda Email Protection, we did use another product for backup internally until we found another solution for internal.

I'm using Barracuda Email Protection for backup and email protection for two purposes. There are also impersonation features and other capabilities, and most of it is acceptable, but the only thing I think that's missing is the WAF and some other features. Domain fraud protection is there, and it's quite comprehensive.

The biggest advantage for me in Barracuda Email Protection is that it's user-friendly, easy to navigate anytime, and the reporting is fine. Unfortunately, you can see all the message logs, which includes the inbound and outbound messages, and that puts it in a way that we feel like we can see emails that are too sensitive for management. That was one of the downfalls. If we could hide that feature, probably we could adjust the admin so we know one is accountable. But for now, once you give anyone rights, they have all the access to see the message logs and everything.

Regarding the threat protection feature in Barracuda Email Protection, it does not help to manage threats or sophisticated threats.

The reporting in Barracuda Email Protection is very good. You can do a weekly or monthly report, and it's excellent.

I find data protection in Barracuda Email Protection is adequate for us.

The downfalls I see are that it doesn't do backup on-premises, WAF is not included, and the issue with the message logs.

Something is missing in Barracuda Email Protection. I would like to see AI incorporation so that whatever AI platforms we are using should detect that something is not legitimate or whatever. If we can have that AI tool, the power tool of AI, that would be excellent.

I have been using Barracuda Email Protection for three years.

I think Barracuda Email Protection is stable and very reliable. The upgrades they do behind the scenes keep us quite happy, with updates, patches, and everything.

In terms of scalability, I would say it wouldn't be expensive to scale, but somehow it will take some other resources here in the operation of administration cost and management. Scalability is expensive for Barracuda Email Protection.

The technical support from Barracuda Email Protection is helpful; you just need to know what you want from them. I would give eight points for support from Barracuda Email Protection.

Before Barracuda Email Protection, we did use another product for backup internally until we found another solution for internal.

In terms of installation and deployment of Barracuda Email Protection, I would say installation is quite easy. It's not complicated. It's just that it's tedious because a lot of things are involved, but immediately in an hour or two, you get to complete it. It's much easier if you are using the cloud one, but if you are using the on-premises component, that's one factor I feel is tedious. The cloud one is more maneuverable to deploy.

The investment in Barracuda Email Protection is quite good for us because we see the value of money on it. We are saving a lot with Barracuda Email Protection. In an estimate, we were paying close to 300,000, but now we are sitting with Barracuda Email Protection at 100,000.

I would say the price for Barracuda Email Protection is very nice; the solution is not expensive.

I see a lot of differences between Barracuda Email Protection and other products. Darktrace is quite amazing, but the only factor I think you are much better with is the pricing, which is quite good. However, Darktrace is exceptional.

I am not using threat protection in Barracuda Email Protection. I am not using link protection; it's only looking at the M365 ones. Even though I mention some problems like the message logs or the absence of WAF, I would still give Barracuda Email Protection the maximum score. I give this review a rating of 10.

My main use case for Proofpoint Email Protection is working as an anti-spam and phishing analyst, where I need to protect the organization and public users from spam and phishing.

In my daily work, I use Proofpoint Email Protection based on ML models that score each email based on sender reputation, IP reputations, and certain AI ML technologies, allowing us to decide whether an email is phishing, spam, or legitimate.

While Proofpoint is better, I find Abnormal to be much more effective because it uses an advanced AI engine to detect email spams and phishing. In Proofpoint, we observe a false positive rate of ten percent, where out of one thousand users, ten users will be improperly scored, causing their emails to move into spam or junk while occasionally, junk emails mistakenly reach the inbox.

The best features that Proofpoint Email Protection offers include its excellent reputation engines, as their IP reputation and PDR reputation are among the best I have encountered due to the daily feeds into their system protecting us from spam and phishing emails from bad IPs and domains.

The specific benefit of those reputation engines in protecting my organization is their capability against zero-day attacks; Proofpoint has an advanced technique that retrieves emails even after they reach the inbox, regardless of whether the user opens them.

I have witnessed a positive impact of Proofpoint Email Protection on my organization, having worked for one of the world's largest organizations that uses Proofpoint consistently for email security.

Most of the time, it removes phishing and spam from email inboxes, but in rare cases, some emails may reach user inboxes. Nevertheless, we can retrieve them using one of the Proofpoint modules.

I believe Proofpoint Email Protection can be improved; currently, it does not allow organizations to create their own IP listings, so whatever comes into Proofpoint is what helps to remove spam and phishing, and organizations should be allowed to tune Proofpoint Email Protection engine.

I chose eight out of ten because the remaining two points are for their AI detection, which is way behind and needs improvement; they need to collaborate with AI providers to fine-tune their reputations with the help of AI.

I have been using Proofpoint Email Protection for six years.

Proofpoint Email Protection is stable.

I rate Proofpoint Email Protection's scalability a ten out of ten.

The customer support is one of the best I have experienced.

I rate the customer support a nine on a scale of one to ten.

Before Proofpoint, we solely relied on our internal spam filter. We chose Proofpoint because it is the number one email security provider, although compared to Abnormal, it is less efficient; however, its cost is lower.

I have seen a return on investment with Proofpoint Email Protection; it handles most processes independently while only requiring employee rotation for fine-tuning.

Before choosing Proofpoint Email Protection, we evaluated O365 spam filter.

Proofpoint Email Protection has affected my SOC analyst workloads because we have built our own internal spam engine that catches what is missed by Proofpoint, though Proofpoint helps us most of the time.

Proofpoint Email Protection provides a good level of visibility into people-based risk within my organization, as it scores emails effectively, but occasionally scores abnormally, so we can raise FN cases with Proofpoint.

I have noticed significant changes in operational efficiency after implementing Proofpoint Email Protection, as it can handle lakhs of emails in a day.

My experience with the Unified Admin Console in Threat Protection Workbench has been beneficial because it helps us release quarantined emails immediately, rescoring them, and we can use those in a whitelist for further processing. The unified UI is effective, especially since they recently improved it, making it easier to find emails and the user list.

My advice for others looking into using Proofpoint Email Protection is to not aggressively score the emails initially; let the ML learn, as it takes around six months to understand the email flow before scoring correctly.

I suggest exploring Abnormal, which is a bit costlier but currently the best solution in the market.

I would rate my overall experience with Proofpoint Email Protection as an eight out of ten.