We performed a comparison between MetaDefender Email Security Solutions and Skyhigh Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."Defender for Office 365 has helped eliminate having to look at multiple dashboards and that is the aspect I like most about it. It is simpler, effective, and convenient. The users like the process efficiency."
"Threat Explorer is an invaluable tool for me, and it plays a crucial role in helping me discern the origins of various email campaigns, pinpointing where they emanate from, and identifying the individuals within our organization who are affected."
"The solution is very easy to use. All you have to do is to assign the license to the end-user and it's done. The customer will only have the feature activated, and the solution will monitor the emails to determine if they are a threat or not."
"The email protection is excellent, especially in terms of anti-phishing policies."
"The product is not resource-intensive."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is the ease of use."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365's most valuable features are safe attachments and safe links."
"The most valuable feature is protection against malicious links, fishing, and impersonation. You can train people to be aware of these threats, but they're not always careful. When they're using their phones between meetings, they click on a link, and it's game over."
"The most valuable feature of MetaDefender Email Security is the CDR. Customers purchase this solution specifically for data communication, as the other features can be obtained through other technologies that most customers already possess. Therefore, data communication serves as the foundation for the platform."
"The most valuable feature is called summary reconstruction which is used to deliver encrypted files to users."
"The sanitization is very good."
"It's a great product with solid features."
"User analytics."
"The management is very good."
"We have gained a deep insight into our Shadow IT usage as well as the different activities involved in Office 365."
"Good anti-virus filtering, URL categorization, and reporting capabilities."
"The other products that I have evaluated do not have the scalability options that McAfee has."
"Tokenization."
"It is easy to configure rules."
"The XDR dashboard has room for improvement."
"Too many false positives and lacks an accurate capability to detect malicious SharePoint sites."
"In one of the reports I can get the exact place where a vulnerable file resides. But for that, I need to explicitly go into the device and check. If they could include that file part in the report, without my having to go to the device itself, that would help."
"Microsoft wants its well-paying customers to finish testing some of its half-baked products, find bugs, and report bugs back to Microsoft's team, which is a little frustrating for those who have to manage it and roll it up to thousands of people across the organization."
"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."
"One area for improvement is integration. For example, when it comes to external SaaS platforms, we were not able to get a lot of information on integrations with such apps for security and authentication."
"About eight months ago, we started to measure the quantity of phishing and spam that we have been receiving, and it has been increasing a lot. That means that protection for our email is not as good as we were expecting."
"There is room for improvement in terms of reporting."
"Although the number of AV engines is good, it could be better."
"They offer a feature called SmartLink neutralization. I have tried it before. It seemed to work most of the time; however, I had a few users for whom it just wouldn't work. Whenever they click on a link, it stays on the MetaDefender page, saying that it's scanning it and never moves forward."
"The DLP should be upgraded and has room for improvement."
"The virtual solution requires improvement."
"The pricing of the solution could be adjusted to make it more reasonable."
"De-tokenization."
"The biggest challenge we have with McAfee is their cross-cloud support."
"McAfee Web Gateway could improve the reporting. We have the reporting on a separate server and sometimes the database becomes full. These aspects could improve."
"The cloud needs improvement with respect to DLP."
"The performance of the tool can be improved to provide faster report generation."
"You have to have some kind of background with cloud-based security, like working with different providers and how to make instances in the clouds and that kind of stuff - including cloud, networking cloud, cloud application development, anything like that is a requirement to be in the CASB space."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More MetaDefender Email Security Solutions Pricing and Cost Advice →
MetaDefender Email Security Solutions is ranked 24th in Email Security with 3 reviews while Skyhigh Security is ranked 6th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 51 reviews. MetaDefender Email Security Solutions is rated 8.4, while Skyhigh Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of MetaDefender Email Security Solutions writes "Helpful support, and useful dashboards". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skyhigh Security writes "Good scalability, but the technical support service needs improvement". MetaDefender Email Security Solutions is most compared with Proofpoint Email Protection and Barracuda Email Security Gateway, whereas Skyhigh Security is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Netskope , Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Symantec Proxy and Zscaler CASB.
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.