"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."
"I love the Advanced Malware Protection feature. It works very well... The appliance has more security such as SDF, DKIM, DMARC, and encryption."
"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."
"It has an intuitive, clear graphical interface where you can deploy your policies and understand the overall flow. There are a lot of things that you cannot handle on the graphic interface, like message filters. For this, you need to go to a lower level where you have more power, like command line interface. So, this solution has the best of both worlds. There are not a lot of bells and whistles. It is more practical with access to most features that you can configure."
"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."
"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."
"The malicious URL scanning, as well as the anti-malware features, have been really useful for us in our environment."
"A stable solution."
"They do a better job of determining what's real and what's not than most of the other solutions we have tried, and it's been very painless to use."
"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."
"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."
"The area of license renewal should be improved. We normally renew our license every year. There is a feature called smart licensing, and I switched from the legacy mode to the smart licensing mode because of what I thought smart licensing does. I thought it would make licensing renewal seamless and very swift, but ever since I've switched to smart licensing, each time I want to renew my license, it is a whole lot of headache. The process is not smooth, and I had to keep calling Cisco TAC to see how the issue can be resolved. At one point, I wanted to revert back to the legacy mode, but I can't revert. Once you switch from the legacy mode to the smart licensing mode, you can't revert. They should improve on the visibility of the smart licensing mode so that it can indeed be smart and easier to use for the license renewal every year. That is one challenge."
"The Forged Email Detection feature needs improvement, particularly with domain. The sensors are not that good and the rules sets are unclear."
"The configuration UI should be made more intuitive. Currently, it takes a while to understand how to do the basic configurations."
"The UI is definitely one area of improvement because it doesn't match other interfaces and the navigation can be a little clunky."
"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."
"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."
"Malware needs improvement."
"They have some areas that could be improved. For example, we also use this solution for email encryption, which was clunky and could be improved, but the email security itself has been excellent."
Earn 20 points
Clearswift SECURE Email Gateway is ranked 25th in Email Security with 1 review while Zix Email Encryption is ranked 26th in Email Security with 1 review. Clearswift SECURE Email Gateway is rated 8.0, while Zix Email Encryption is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Clearswift SECURE Email Gateway writes "Stable, but malware needs improvement and customer support is poor". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zix Email Encryption writes "Inexpensive, with good email security, but the technical support could be improved". Clearswift SECURE Email Gateway is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection, Proofpoint Email Protection, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and Symantec Messaging Gateway, whereas Zix Email Encryption is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Proofpoint Email Protection, Symantec Data Loss Prevention and Barracuda Email Security Gateway.
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.
