"The solution is very configurable. It has enabled us to configure some specific filters to stop emails that general configurations didn't stop. It's a powerful solution. It can analyze a lot of emails simultaneously, with no problems of capacity or system load."
"There is a huge return compared to if we didn't have a gateway appliance, as far as blocking malicious emails."
"I love the Advanced Malware Protection feature. It works very well... The appliance has more security such as SDF, DKIM, DMARC, and encryption."
"Anti-Spam and Advanced Malware Protection are the most valuable features... and we also have the option to block Zero-day attacks."
"The added value of it is that every migration to a new version is initiated by the Cisco version itself, so that is a bunch of work that you don't have to do on the Cisco ESA system on-premise. As it becomes a safe platform, you don't need to invest anything in your own data center or in your upgrade path."
"The filtering is definitely better at catching both spam and malicious messages, and there's a lot of extremely granular ability for setting up rules. You can do it the way you want to. The Microsoft solution tends to be pretty limited in how it allows some of that to be done."
"It is doing its work. It is doing what it was actually designed to do. It has ensured we don't have business email compromises, and it has also ensured that our brand Galaxy is unique all year round."
"The malicious URL scanning, as well as the anti-malware features, have been really useful for us in our environment."
"FireEye is good for malware depicting and security."
"What I find most valuable with the solution is that it can integrate with cloud solutions, such as Google and Microsoft. Additionally, the solution is easy to use."
"We can control this solution from the cloud and are able to access it from wherever we are."
"The auto-remediation feature is valuable."
"The product helps reduce the number of malicious emails reaching the user's inbox."
"They can do it better with web links, with the URLs. They have a technology called Outbreak but it doesn't work as well as we would like."
"The interface is dated. It has looked pretty much the same for 15 years or so. It would be helpful to be able to do everything from one spot. The centralized quarantine and reporting are completely separate from policy administration."
"The UI is definitely one area of improvement because it doesn't match other interfaces and the navigation can be a little clunky."
"We have been struggling in the last month with Cisco encryption and with the S/MIME encryption. I don't know if it is an issue on our side or if these features of the solution are not working very well."
"We have Microsoft and we have the E5 licenses, they have more EDR responses on certain emails. That's something that Cisco ESA on the cloud doesn't have. They don't do anything about MITRE attacks. They only detect if there is a malicious email or a threat and they remove it."
"The configuration UI should be made more intuitive. Currently, it takes a while to understand how to do the basic configurations."
"I would like more functionality and how to use it for Level 2 type staff. The biggest issue is it needs to be easier to use and navigate."
"I use the search all the time. Sometimes, it is hard to search for things and things are hard to find. People come to me all the time, saying, "This email didn't get through." Then, I go searching and don't find it on the first search. You have to think about alternative searches. I don't know if there is an easier way that they could help to find things. I don't know how they could simplify it, because now everybody else is using the cloud and everything is coming from Office 365, or whatever. It is just not the same environment from years ago where everybody had their own server and you could search easier."
"I would like the solution to be able to automatically quarantine the malicious emails before getting to the user's mailbox and continue with regular email operations. This could result in the user clicking the email before the purge operation is completed."
"The spam detection feature could be better."
"The solution needs better support."
"The custom tailoring is limited."
"If they want to be the primary or best solution, they need to have better email management features."
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 1st in Email Security with 11 reviews while FireEye Email Security is ranked 9th in Email Security with 5 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 9.0, while FireEye Email Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Email writes "Stops the vast majority of email from getting in, across our multiple email domains". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FireEye Email Security writes "Easy to set up with good stability and great anti-spam features". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Proofpoint Email Protection, Fortinet FortiMail, Cisco Secure Email Cloud Mailbox, Barracuda Email Security Gateway and Symantec Messaging Gateway, whereas FireEye Email Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, Fortinet FortiMail, Forcepoint Email Security and DMARC Compass. See our Cisco Secure Email vs. FireEye Email Security report.
See our list of best Email Security vendors.
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.
