We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Email and McAfee Web Protection [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."It also gives the vulnerability status according to the versions you have selected. Let's say you have Google Chrome. It mentions the versions it has, and it updates. Within two hours of an update, it is reflected in the dashboard. That's really nice to have."
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"Defender enables us to secure all 365-related activity from a single place. It gives us visibility into everything happening in Outlook, protecting us against phishing and other email-based threats. Defender helps us detect any suspicious behaviors."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"At the moment we are satisfied with this product. It's a stable, scalable, and resilient solution for us."
"The risk level notifications are most valuable. We get to know what kind of intrusion or attack is there, and we can fix a problem on time."
"It also gives me good visibility because, with Defender, I'm using a Microsoft product to defend Microsoft products. The integration was really seamless and I have wide visibility because it picks up almost everything. Literally, I can see almost every activity that happens, from the e-mail to the workstation itself."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"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 strong point of the solution is that we hardly get any spam emails because of Cisco Secure Email."
"The most significant enhancement we've gained is in terms of security through the upgrade we received."
"The system provides our service desk with the means to troubleshoot email delivery issues with ease."
"Spam controls are excellent because they are a powerful feature that operates almost effortlessly."
"There is a huge return compared to if we didn't have a gateway appliance, as far as blocking malicious emails."
"The most valuable feature is the different content filters we are using, such as DKIM."
"Capital expenditure is a significant consideration, and the impact on major expenditures prompts a careful analysis before onboarding the new product."
"Provides good accessibility and handles any overload very well."
"The solution is not too expensive. It's affordable."
"The product is quite an effective firewall."
"The most valuable features of McAfee Web Protection are the reporter, and you have the option to have an agent installed in the notebooks or on the mobiles. You are able to have the same policies inside and outside of your organization which is a benefit."
"The stability has a good standard right now."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"It's a solution that permits making a granular configuration and it is easier to deploy the same configuration on a lot of devices using the central console. It is the master of the product."
"It is functional. It has reduced risk and downtime while also ensuring regulatory compliance, which is critical."
"The certification training for Defender for 365 needs to be deeper and incorporate Sentinel. I took all the security courses except one, and Sentinel isn't included."
"You should be able to deploy Defender for every subscription without the need to add servers."
"There needs to be an improvement in integrating the product to work across multiple operating systems, and to have better support for non-Microsoft file types."
"We need a separate license and we don't know how to get the license that is required."
"We need to be able to whitelist data at the backend."
"The product must provide better malware detection."
"Microsoft should provide more documentation for users so they can self-educate. I would like to see more documentation for advanced security features."
"Configuration requires going to a lot of places rather than just accessing one tab."
"The pricing needs to be reconsidered or enhanced."
"Cisco Email Secure's pricing needs to be less. We have vendors who provide cheaper solutions with the same features."
"The solution does not have a strong outbound service. It should also integrate DLP."
"The solution needs to improve its advanced phishing filters. It is very good at filtering things which have bad reputations. However, when phishing or malicious emails are new or coming from a legitimate source, we don't feel that the solution is working."
"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."
"We have occasionally had hardware problems because we are using an appliance-based solution, but that might change. We may consider going to virtual systems."
"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."
"Many smaller businesses opt for more cost-effective solutions, such as Gmail or Hotmail accounts, instead of investing in Cisco Secure Email, given its higher cost."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"The solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
"The solution should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"The True Key version for mobile phones should be improved. The password manager is not as seamless as on the desktop. Once implemented, on the desktop, when you go to the site, it automatically fills and connects you, whereas, on the mobile phone, it doesn't do that quite seamlessly. You need to open the True Key application and then select the password you want to use. It then opens in the browser. There are fewer steps in the desktop version as compared to the mobile version."
"The configuration could be simplified because it is more complex to make the configuration on McAfee. What can be improved is the support of the agent on smartphones, IOS or Android. That still now is not available yet."
"I'm not sure if the solution itself is cloud-based or not. If it isn't they really need to begin to develop that out a bit."
"Lacking filter for spam."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 2nd in Email Security with 55 reviews while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Email Security with 16 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4, while McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Email writes "Has effortless spam control, improves security posture, and frees up our IT department's time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee Web Protection [EOL] writes "Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Trellix Collaboration Security, Fortinet FortiMail, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Proofpoint Email Protection and Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense, whereas McAfee Web Protection [EOL] is most compared with .
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.