Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) Reviews

We are using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for the migration of users from on-premise to the cloud.

The most valuable features of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection are the EOP, ATP, safe links, fishing, and antispam.

Not all settings can be configured automatically and most still require manual configuration. However, there is an automation tool available that can be used to input all the configurations either as a script or a tool it would be helpful.

I have been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for approximately three years.

The stability of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is good. We have not had many issues.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection a nine out of ten.

I have used Mimecast. I do not have a lot of experience in Mimecast. 

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection can handle a more broad range of areas than Mimecast.

The initial setup of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection and streamlining is complex. When we use a feature and we try to streamline them based on its outcomes can be difficult, such as false positives.

We often use third-party tools for the deployment. We try and use Microsoft native tools, such as Office Configuration Analyzer.

I help my customers implement the solution and it typically takes one week with two consultants.

The price of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is reasonable.

If you're looking for recommendations, I suggest selecting the standard or strict settings provided by Microsoft for configuring Microsoft Exchange Online Protection. You can start with the standard settings and gradually increase the blocking and other settings such as spam confidence level based on your experience over time. It's important to keep in mind that further tuning may be required based on false positives and other factors, which will require manual adjustments based on experience. This configuration process is not a one-time setup and will evolve based on your customer experience.

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

I work in a financial institution and we use Microsoft Exchange Online Protection to protect our CEO's emails and all users' emails from phishing and other threats.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is the accidental release of information protection capabilities. Additionally, the solution is easy to use.

The price of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection could be reduced to make it more competitive.

I have been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for approximately one year.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is stable.

We have had some issues and the support we received was good and quick.

I have used other solutions, such as Carbon Black and Trend Micro Deep Discovery Email Inspector. I found that Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is a much better solution because the search time is quicker and there are more alert results.

The configuration of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is easier than other solutions.

We did the deployment of the solution in-house.

The solution is priced high and could be less expensive compared to other solutions.

There is no maintenance needed for this solution, but we have analyzed the results from the findings from the alerts.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Exchange Online Protection a ten out of ten.

We use Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for scanning and protecting email attachments and URLs. Primarily we use Mimecast for URL protection, but it's good to have a second step, particularly Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, just in case something slips through.

What I like most about Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is its integration with Windows, so we have one central view for all alerts and incidents.

I'm pretty happy with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, so off the top of my head, I can't think of any reason for me to want to change something in the solution.

Having orchestration features added to Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, particularly automation and remediation, would be quite useful.

I've been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection for five or six years.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is quite stable.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is a scalable solution.

I haven't contacted technical support for Microsoft Exchange Online Protection.

Before Microsoft Exchange Online Protection, we used Mimecast. We still use Mimecast, but for an antimalware solution, we've always used what's available on Windows.

I didn't configure the solution, so I can't tell if the setup was straightforward or complex. Our Exchange administrators were the ones who set up Microsoft Exchange Online Protection.

We implemented the solution in-house.

Our license for Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is covered by our enterprise agreement.

There are three thousand users of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection in our company. There is no plan to increase the number of users, at least not in the near future.

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is quite a difficult product. I would recommend it because it's a good product. My advice to others looking into using it is to make sure their rules are configured correctly, and they have turned on all the necessary features.

I'm rating Microsoft Exchange Online Protection eight out of ten.

The product's end-of-life cycle could be extended. When it gets upgraded, we should receive some incentives. For example, someone who has purchased a Microsoft professional license should be able to renew or upgrade without buying a new product.

There have been some online intrusions on security. If Microsoft packaged the updates more frequently, the protection would be better. If updates take less time, we might receive malicious emails.

Additionally, I would like to see changes in the licensing model. If someone has a corporate license with many users, they should get a better price.

I have been working with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) since 1998.

We could get technical support services directly from Microsoft.

Positive

We use Sophos for email protection. Sophos enhances our accessibility and helps prevent malicious email intrusions.

The product is expensive. 

The email policy configuration options in Microsoft EOP are satisfactory. I recommend it to any user who wants to use Microsoft. 

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use the product to configure anti-spam solutions.

The product's most valuable feature is third-party integrations.

The management interface of Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) could be intuitive. Additionally, it could be easy to configure and fine-tune the components.

We have been using Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) for two years.

It is a stable platform.

It is a scalable product.

I work with Microsoft's technical support team a lot. In some simple cases, the services are very good. However, it needs improvement for dealing with complex issues.

Neutral

I have experience working with Mimecast and Barracuda. In comparison, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection has good integration and policies. However, it is not easy to configure.

The initial setup process is easy. At the same time, it's complicated to configure. From a maintenance perspective, it requires keeping a tab on the console for security or operations to filter out emails.

The product generates a good return on investment for the US market.

The product's pricing is competitive for the US market. However, it is expensive for the regions where businesses don't have enough budget to invest.

I recommend Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) to others and rate it a seven out of ten.

Microsoft EOP's most valuable feature is a shared mailbox. 

The solution needs to improve its backup. 

I rate the tool's stability a ten out of ten. 

Microsoft EOP is scalable. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward. You need to get a license to use the product. 

I rate Microsoft EOP a ten 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. 

We use it for email protection. 

Microsoft Exchange Online Protection is very good when it comes to anti-phishing and anti-malware. And the fact that it has an impersonation feature for the domain as well as users.

The reporting needs a little bit of improvement. When you compare it to Mimecast features and data porting tools, it's less superior compared to EOP.

Another area of improvement could be pricing. So Exchange Online Protection has a higher price compared to its competitors.

I've been working with it for over three years now.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. The scalability is pretty good; it does what it is supposed to do. I haven't encountered many issues because Microsoft regularly updates its product.

We're just over 650 users in our company using this solution.

The customer service and support have been really helpful. Whenever we raise a support ticket with them, they respond in a timely manner, and almost 99.9% of the time, issues are resolved.

Positive

I have used MessageLabs in the past, and I would say that EOP is better than MessageLabs in terms of the interface and ease of use. 

The initial setup is easy. Moreover, it is easy to maintain. The deployment model is cloud-based, but we are in a hybrid environment. So it does protect our on-premises environment as well.

The initial deployment was done by our IT team. In our IT department, I would say roughly 12 people are required for maintenance.

It's a high price. When comparing it to Microsoft Defender and Mimecast, it is more expensive. 

I would definitely require using this solution. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.