Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) Reviews

I am using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) for word processing, spreadsheet management, Power BI, checking my meetings, using Teams, and for Exchange emails. I am utilizing all Microsoft products such as Word, Excel, and PowerPoint.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) has been valuable in providing its own antivirus, which in the last three years, has resulted in no antivirus problems.

I would like to improve the setting of rules in Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) as it is currently working fine but has room for enhancements.

I have been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) for the past three years.

I conducted research on products like Zimbra, Google Workspace, and Microsoft Exchange.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) nine out of ten. As a government user and head of Information Technology at an organization, I gave the solution a minute, and it exceeded expectations, hence the high rating. If you have additional requirements, please email them for further discussions.

Public Cloud

Other

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection has features like DLP (data loss protection), Safe Attachment, and Safe Links. Also, it has a Litigation Hold feature that is useful for email protection in cases where emails are deleted because of mishandling.

If you want extensive email security, you need to purchase a Plan 2 license. Plan 1 and Plan 2 are the two plans for Microsoft Exchange Online Protection. Some customers hesitate to purchase this product because it adds some costs to them, which is necessary for them. It would be helpful for customers if Plan 1 features were included with EOP. However, they still need to purchase Plan 2 for advanced security features.

One of our clients recently requested to compare Zimbra's features with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection. Zimbra is open source, while Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is not. When I compare both the products, many free features are available in Zimbra because it is open-source software.

It makes no sense to request Microsoft Exchange Online Protection add all the features people get on open-source software like Zimbra. Hence, I would say whatever features Microsoft Exchange Online Protection has are enough. Microsoft has a dedicated research team that should research and add new techniques like phishing and spamming solutions to the product.

I have been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection since January 2000. I work as a Microsoft distributor.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is a stable product. I have been working with it for the past four or five years, and it is one of the most effective and popular products in our country for email security. Since it has a yearly or monthly subscription, adding Plan 1 to EOP would be very helpful, increasing the product's popularity even more.

As far as I know, and as far as I have worked with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, its scalability is okay enough. I used this solution for small, medium, and large companies.

Since our region is tied to the Indian region, the technical support is okay and supportive. However, it would be more helpful if support is enabled in our country.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection manages too many sites from India, including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Bhutan. Sometimes they experience too many hiccups, except for severity-level cases. The technical support team responds according to the SLA, but sometimes they break it. A support center in Bangladesh would be very helpful for us.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection a seven or eight out of ten for its technical support.

Positive

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is much easier to deploy. We have faced issues with platform-to-platform migrations, such as Zimbra to Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, GoDaddy to Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, and Google G Suite to Microsoft Exchange Online Protection migrations.

In all of these cases, we have encountered challenges during migration. If we get migration support from Microsoft, we can increase our sales by 10 to 20%.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection's pricing is a little bit more because its price has recently increased. The product's price should be reduced by at least 10% because it's software, and they're just recovering their costs. If you sell 100 units with a profit of $5 for each unit, you make $500 in profits. However, if you reduce the profit to $3 for each unit and sell 1,000 units, you make a higher profit of $3000.

Even if they lose some revenue, their product reach will improve because there are many customers in Bangladesh. If Microsoft Exchange Online Protection reduces its price, its users will increase. The approximate licensing cost of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection varies depending on different packages.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection has lots of features. The solution offers a zero draft model, which is the most robust model for email security, identity protection, and endpoint security. According to the Gartner report, it's a good product. Microsoft Exchange Online Protection's product and client feedback is very good. The solution's price should be reduced, and Plan 1 features should be included with Exchange Online Protection.

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

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. 

Hybrid Cloud

Other

My use case for Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) is basically to protect ourselves from phishing emails and to improve our email security.

The best features of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) include its reliability with removing spam and its impressive automatic filtering.

We've benefited from the anti-phishing features of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), as it has been quite accurate and has eliminated most of our phishing emails, making it really impressive.

The user interface of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) has room for improvement, as at times it doesn't make sense where to go to access certain features.

I've been working with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) for over a year now.

I consider Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) to be a stable solution.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) is a scalable solution.

I would rate technical support from Microsoft for Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) a seven on a scale from one to ten.

Positive

The initial setup of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) was quite straightforward, which is one of the positives of the tool.

We managed our deployment of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) ourselves, without using a third party such as an integrator or consultant.

I find the price of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) to be fairly reasonable, and I have no problems with it.

My advice for people looking into using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) is that if you're just starting out, the Microsoft documentation is often quite helpful, and if you read that, then you have no need to contact support. I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) nine out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

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.

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 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.