Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) Reviews

We are using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for all our customers. Microsoft doesn't give you a preconfigured solution like other vendors. Microsoft has come out of that plug-and-play concept, and for every product, you need to reconfigure and fine-tune it according to your needs.

With Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, if malware is attached to a mailer, it's very easy to go into the incident alert and find out what's happening with that identity and the mail.

If a company wants to put in line back-to-back anti-spam solutions, they need to work on that part because Microsoft recommends either you use EOP as a front line or you don't use it. Microsoft Exchange Online Protection needs to work on this shortcoming.

Microsoft needs to redo its pricing regarding Microsoft Exchange Online Protection because every customer who buys Microsoft 365 needs Microsoft Exchange Online Protection.

I have been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for around four to five years.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection ten out of ten for stability.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection an eight out of ten for scalability. Around 70,000 users use Microsoft Exchange Online Protection in our organization.

Microsoft's technical support is much better than other vendors. However, Microsoft engineers need to be guided. For example, if I tell Microsoft's EOL team about a certificate issue, I need to let them know about the issue and the article I'm talking about, and then they will fix it for me.

Since I come from an Exchange background, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection's initial setup is simple.

At times, when we are doing URL whitelisting, we raise it to the support, and Microsoft removes one feature of whitelisting.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection a nine out of ten.

We use the solution in all our environments. We use it for remedy tickets and give them updates. It was our main communication point. 

The solution can be complex at times. It would be nice to have the on-server version. It needs to improve the stability as well. 

I have been working with the product for seven years. 

The tool is scalable and it helps us to add/remove new users, servers, clusters, etc. 

The solution's setup is complex and it took us months to complete the deployment. 

We did the product's deployment in-house. 

We have seen an ROI with the tool's use. 

The solution's pricing is subscription-based rather than a yearly licensing cost. Pricing is based on the size of the environment and company and can be expensive. 

I would rate the product a seven out of ten. 

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection protects remote and on-site users against email-based threats. 

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection guards against threats regardless of whether our users are in the office. If you receive an email with a malicious link, the solution will warn you against opening it. 

The solution uses artificial intelligence and machine learning, so you don't need train it to detect something. The detection and response times are short. It's an excellent product.

Microsoft should publicize the solution more because it isn't well known. I appreciate the solution because it does a lot of things that I used to do manually. I didn't realize something like this existed. I went to Symantec, Trend Micro, and other providers, but Microsoft had the only solution to my problems. 

I would like to get reports about vulnerable connections from our clients with information about domains, public IPs, etc. That would be highly useful.

I have used Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for two years.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection nine out of 10 for stability.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection 10 out of 10 for scalability.

I rate Microsoft support eight out of 10.

Positive

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is easy to set up.

We have seen a return on our investment. 

The solution is fairly priced.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection nine out of 10. 

We use Microsoft Exchange Online Protection to secure our users' accounts. For example, we implement MFA on our users' emails to ensure their mailboxes or accounts are secured. Aside from providing the username and password, the solution provides a code or additional security to ensure their accounts are properly secured. We also used a phishing tool.

I want a seamless way of archiving users' emails on Exchange. When a user's emails are archived on the system, we find out their mailbox is large the moment we need to copy those files back. Another issue is with OneDrive, in that if a user has files stored on OneDrive when they exit, the license is removed. As a result, transferring those files to another user is a problem. It should be possible for there to be a central location where each of those files is stored. That way, even after a user leaves and the license is removed, we don't lose access to that information after 90 days.

The solution should protect mailboxes. Most of our users have emails on their mobile, so if a staff member exits from the corporation, we need something that mimics email on the mobile. Some tools delete all of a user's emails and passwords the moment they leave that environment or their employer, but I don't think Microsoft has any such tools. It's important because passwords and sensitive information could pass into the wrong people's hands.

I've used the solution for the last two or three years now.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very scalable. There are between 350 to 400 users using the solution. There are plans to increase the usage.

We used to use Google Mail before migrating to Exchange.

It is straightforward to deploy the solution. It takes three hours or so to deploy it. We have five people managing the solution.

We pay licensing fees yearly.

Earlier, we had Microsoft Exchange on-prem and then moved to 365.

I recommend the solution to other users because it is easy to start a business. I rate it a five out of ten.

Our company uses the solution to provide customers with threat management. We group emails or policies from DLP, configure them, and resolve alerts. 

Customers have multiple teams who are responsible for managing the solution's features. For example, a customer might have security and DevOps teams with an engineering team just to manage email. Across all management teams, there might be up to fifty users. Companywide, the solution is used by every employee because it is associated with email. 

The threat management feature includes policies and alerts that are valuable. 

The solution is expensive.

Performance and speed should continue to be improved. Microsoft is in a state of constant modifications to ensure their engines always perform. They have the budget and longevity to to know what they need to continue doing without outside advice. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable with no issues. 

The solution is scalable to any customer needs. Internally, we don't have plans to scale. 

I contacted technical support for issues with Azure permissions. I wanted to understand the readable permissions required to see entire subscriptions if you are not an organization's domain administrator. They reached out to me pretty quickly, their approach was okay, and they resolved my issue. 

I rate support a ten out of ten. 

Positive

The setup is straightforward. 

We implement the solution for customers. 

The solution is expensive but is backed by Microsoft's reputation. 

Some companies have difficulty with billing because they are surprised by ongoing costs. For example, you might purchase a package but then realize you need other things. Microsoft might alert you of security issues but when you try to reconfigure, you find that you have to pay for the feature. If you already have an agreement for $500,000 it is difficult to add $500,000 to do things the best way. 

The cloud version is more expensive than on-premises but it resolves any scalability issues. The cloud's purpose is to always be available without any work. 

Microsoft delivers the whole package in one solution. It manages servers, domain controls, security, firewalls, WAF, EDR, antiviruses, proxies, and email. In the future, there will be firewalls for email. 

I use Proofpoint as a security solution on top of Microsoft. From a security and IT perspective, it is always good to have multiple vendors. An entire environment with Microsoft solutions might have a gap. 

In my experience, everyone is using Azure or solutions from Microsoft. Word, Excel, and Outlook are present for a majority of companies. There is very little on the Google platform for email. 

The solution's discussion is more about budget and whether you are going to choose the on-premises or the cloud version. 

Microsoft is huge and a top-three vendor that really only competes with AWS and maybe Oracle. Certain features like scalability really are not relevant because the company's reputation is more than enough. Age in the market and investments in security are more important. You can rest assured that Microsoft has a particular team dedicated to each feature or issue. They are always improving and always delivering. 

Certain features of the solution will be valuable based on your role. For example, I am part of the security team so threat management is interesting to me. An an engineer or email team might be more interested in policies, configuration, or the administrative exchange. 

Nothing is perfect but the solution is very good. When you don't have opponents, it is easier to achieve a good rating. I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

My company uses Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for additional security, spam filtering, and DNS spoofing.

The most valuable features of the solution are the security and compliance it offers to users.

The solution lacks to elaborate on its spam policies. For improvement, spam policies need to be more elaborate.

I have been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for seven years. I use the solution's latest version. I am a customer of the solution.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven and a half out of ten.

The product's availability is somewhat limited. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I contacted the solution's technical support in the past, and they quickly responded. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection was easy.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The pricing for the solution depends on what you are trying to achieve with the use of the product, but I know that it is not a cheaply priced product. Yearly payments have to be made towards the licensing fees of the solution.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is a good product.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

I manage all the users and special accounts with the tool. 

You can use the product to create special accounts. 

We have experienced issues while migrating from on-prem to the cloud. The tool needs to improve its stability. 

I have been working with the solution for more than ten years. 

I would rate the product's stability an eight out of ten. 

My experience with the tech support team is good. 

The product's setup is easy and quick. 

We relied on a third-party to complete the deployment. 

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Our primary use case is to support client environments. We need to check if everything is working fine if the email flows are fine, and if any certificates need to be renewed. Those are the system admin jobs that we do as system engineers.

The console has everything we need for management. We use all the available features. Every feature available in the management console is sufficient for us to manage.

All those features within the management, the exchange management, whether it's the shell management or the console management, are sufficient by themselves for the versions of the PUs. They keep changing the versions with every update, and they also add feature updates to the consoles. So that also keeps upgrading. So, the solution keeps improving. 

The best part is Microsoft EOP also includes publishing management, more inclusive with Exchange and all SharePoint and everything as well. So, they have partial modules for each Exchange and SharePoint. So that is a good thing as well. We can now manage things through partial. It could be done remotely as well. You don't have to sit on the server. It could also be on a jumpbox and just shell into it directly to an exchange server and manage that exchange server.  

I've been using it since I started working, so it's been a while. So, I have been working with this solution since 2016. 

The solution is fairly stable. The stability depends on when there's an outage or issues. From the Microsoft standard, they have had some issues within, maybe if there are some vulnerabilities in use. If there are some rogue actors or somebody has compromised the Exchange servers or something, they've affected the Exchange server services in the past. So, they do send out information. You can obtain that information from their site, which states, "This is what has happened with the Exchange servers, or all the Exchange servers may be down at the moment." So, those sorts of outages are already reported. And if Microsoft detects them, they report it across all the platforms and communities, providing information through chat as well. So, some visibility is always there.

Stability also depends on the way you manage it, basically. It comes down to how well it's managed, set up, and managed for individual organizations at their sites. So, that's why we have server admins to see how it's managed.

If the server hardware is sufficient enough, if they have sufficient memory, or if they're properly supporting Microsoft EOP. The system requirements need to be fine-tuned. All the VMs hosted need enough memory, and there should be sufficient storage for the databases and such.

So, from Microsoft's point of view, the stability of Exchange as a product depends on the servers running based on our recommendations and specifications. So, it all hinges on the licensing the users have purchased from Microsoft. Unless there's an outage or a vicious attack, or some malicious attack on the service itself, which they report immediately, there aren't any significant issues.

So, I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. Almost everyone in the company uses it, probably thousands of end users. We didn't encounter any problems with scalability. In fact, Microsoft provides recommendations on how to migrate to the cloud and such. So, everything is seamless. 

Even when configuring reserves, it automatically alerts you with exceptions and errors. Especially during mailbox migrations to the cloud, like stage migrations or batch migrations, it provides suggestions. For example, it might notify you that you're processing too many mailboxes at once based on their sizes and recommend reducing the quantity. These prompts are readily available. 

We opted for this solution because most of the enterprises we have to support the basic applications we support. We are the 365 admins as well as Azure admins, and also in the on-prem environment. So we keep migrating mailboxes and chatboxes over, and sometimes, we have to do complete exchange migrations to the cloud. SharePoint migrations, we handle, as well as a server management team.

The initial setup is just a standard process. You just need to follow the Microsoft documentation and send whichever you're very comfortable with your experience. For everything, there are articles and documentation with Microsoft. You just need to follow them, and it's just that you need to consider what your environment is and how to expand information about your current infrastructure. Based on that, you have to consider things while upgrading it or moving it across the cloud.

Some of them are completely cloud. Some of them are hybrid environments. They have a few on-premises for legacy printers and legacy applications. So, for SMTP communication and other stuff. But mostly, most of the users' mailboxes are on the cloud.

The time taken for deployment depends on the size of the organization, how many mailboxes they have, and the main databases. There's no one standard procedure. It could range from a few hours for a small organization to weeks for a large organization.

The licensing can be on the expensive side, especially in the cloud space. They may not be the absolute most expensive option, but they are indeed on the higher end. However, that comes with a certain level of quality. It's like comparing Apple products to other phones in the market. For example, Apple iPhones and tablets are priced higher for a reason. They are known for their security and quality, which is why they can command a premium price.

And people are willing to pay that premium because they trust the brand.

I would rate it nine out of ten because of its widespread usage and trust in the market at the enterprise level. Microsoft products, especially Exchange, are widely used and trusted. 

They have a significant presence, capturing a major share of the enterprise market. All their applications are widely used, whether it's for emails, databases, SQL, backups with OneDrive, cloud storage, or SharePoint, and more. They offer a suite of products for office tools. So, these are the commonly used tools in any organization, be it medium-sized, small, or even a small retailer. Given this, I would rate them a nine or ten because of their extensive market share, both globally and locally.

Microsoft's dependability and trust are a result of its long-standing presence in the industry. They've been in business for a significant amount of time.