Mimecast Email Security Reviews

We use Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection for email security.

What I like about the integration is that it is directly into Microsoft 365, users can use their Microsoft 365 credentials to log into the portal and access their mail.

It does have integrations, and there is an app that can be added to Outlook to allow them to do what they need to do. 

While some of the setups are probably not as user-friendly as some of the other platforms, there is a lot of customization that you can do to the platform to help you pull up a lot of stuff that shouldn't be going into users' mailboxes.

I believe the world is going through a crazy period right now, and everyone is attempting to penetrate different systems as quickly as possible and change their ways of doing things. 

I have always found Mimecast to be very responsive; for example, if we see something come through, they address it and it helps to sort out the issues. Overall, I'm pleased with them. I think I just look at what's out there every year during renewal time to see if we're still on the best platform or if we should consider migrating to something else.

It has great reporting, and we can see what's going on.

I am pleased with the features we have at the moment and everything it does; it's only one piece of the puzzle for our environment, but I'm pleased with how it detects things and some of the functionality that we have had to set up due to the complexity of our business and security. I'm pleased with everything. I don't have anything specific in mind that I'd be looking for.

While it's quick and easy, the initial setup could be more user-friendly.

I have been working with Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection for two or three years.

I did not have any issues with the stability of Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection.

Maybe once in the last year, but it was a short period of time. Everything comes through. The capabilities during the impersonation protection, integrating with some of our various partners, and so on so that we can work seamlessly with them as well. Overall, I found it very easy to work with them.

Technical support is good. I haven't had any problems with technical support.

Obviously, there is a paid add-on depending on the level of support you require, but they are extremely responsive. Whenever I call in, they usually resolve my issue right away, we'll go over it and give me a callback. It's not like I'm waiting weeks or months for a response. So far, so good.

To be honest, the initial setup was very quick and easy. I had a quick turnaround because I was transitioning away from another company we were using called AppRiver and their SecureTide product, which was okay but not my favorite. I didn't like the integrations and other procedures we had to go through, and the Mimecast product seemed to fit better in comparison.

There is a lot of functionality that we haven't fully taken advantage of. 

I would say, make sure you are selecting a product that best fits your business.

Some things will be added as you go through the implementation process. Since our implementation, items have been added, and with some of the functionality that they have, we simply don't have the time to assess and determine what we require.

I would recommend reviewing everything that comes with your product license and ensuring that it is covered when you go through the implementation process.

I would rate Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection an eight out of ten.

We use Mimecast as our email gateway. We also use it as our archival service. All those phishing, anti-phishing, spear phishing, spamming, and other security filters that they have, we use all of them.

We have found email security very good.

The gateway is excellent. 

We have found the archival services to be very valuable.

It's really quite user-friendly. In terms of technical superiority and the product itself, there are no complaints. It is really cutting edge.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It was not so much about the product itself, however, their business model needs improvement. We have subscribed to an archival service, and yet, when we have to get our data out, we have to pay a fee to get our own data. They charge an extraction fee. This is something which really worries us as a company.

I've used the solution for about six years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very good.

The solution can scale well. If a company needs to expand, it can do so rather easily.

We have grown from about 2,600 users to about 4,000 users. We have added additional geography as well. The product is resilient enough to take care of all of this.

We have contracts and we are also subscribed to a service plan. Whenever we have used it, the service levels have been very good and we have no reason to complain.

We were previously thinking of an alternative to Mimecast for two reasons. The main reason is as an organization, we are in the financial service industry, and we have to show some data resiliency to our regulators. However, due to the fact that we're present in 30 countries, what happens is all Mimecast data is centrally hosted in one particular grid, which is preventing us from showing data resiliency to them. I want a solution that allows me to selectively map users to a particular geography. 

We didn't find the initial implementation complex. It was pretty easy and rather straightforward.  We didn't run into trouble.

We are a complex organization. We are present in 30 countries. It was a mix of on-prem and some were in Office 365. Due to the set up of our own architecture, we had to undergo some labor, however, otherwise, the entire process was pretty straightforward.

We typically use a subscription service. If there are version upgrades. We automatically get upgraded to the latest version, as it's a software as a service setup. We don't need to update it as Mimecast takes care of it.

If you need to extract data from their archival service, there is an additional fee involved.

As we are an enterprise customer and we have a relationship with them, what we are told by the reseller is that we pay about 40% of their list price for this product.

It's an expensive solution. There are other competitors, like Barracuda, who offer similar services. We believe that over the years, they have picked up, and their pricing is much more competitive than Mimecast. As an organization, Microsoft itself has really matured over the years. They offer probably 90% of what Mimecast is offering, and then you don't have to pay anything extra for it because it comes with part of the Office 365 licenses. That is why we also believe that there is a lot of room for Mimecast to get their act together, pricing-wise.

We evaluated a few other options such as Cisco IronPort as a security service. We evaluated Proofpoint. The comprehensive solution that Mimecast offers, however, really made us sign on the dotted line.

We're just an end-user.

We use their Perimeter Defense plan, we use their Continuity plan, we also use email to archive. These are the three scales that we use from them.

I would advise others considering the solution to technically evaluate their competencies, their highs, and lows, first. Also, read the fine print, and understand the exact costs. A company will need to understand natively how much of Mimecast capabilities does Microsoft offer if you just subscribe to an Office 365 license. It might make them rethink using this solution.

From a technical standpoint, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the product for email security purposes. 

The platform's most valuable features are journaling and email archiving, effectively stopping phishing attacks.

The product's interface could be improved to be more user-friendly. 

I have been using Mimecast Email Security for only six months.

The product is stable. I rate the stability an eight. 

I rate the product scalability a ten out of ten. 

The technical support services are good. 

Positive

I previously used Microsoft for email security. We switched because Microsoft was difficult to use, especially regarding management and administration.

The initial setup was moderately complex. It took about two weeks to implement and go into production, partly due to coordination with our US team.

I rate the process a six out of ten. 

The implementation was done in-house.

The product price is moderate. I rate the pricing a five out of ten. 

Training from YouTube videos has been helpful, making Mimecast Email Security easier to use and understand. 

I rate the product an eight.

I am an investment research analyst. We use this solution for spam and as our security filter.

It's good, it keeps the spam out. 

It does a really good job at not allowing threats through.

This solution can be frustrating. It blocks many things that should be going through. I have to authorize permission, which seems to be a frequent occurrence. It may be that we have set our protection too high but we work in a regulated industry.

When you click to change permissions on something, it always launches a browser instance to tell me that I have taken an action. I have to close that out and go on to the next one, and when I asign permission another item, again it opens up a browser again to notify me that I have taken action. I don't know why it does that or why it is necessary.

The filtering needs more flexibility.

I have been using Mimecast for four or five years.

I have not had any issues with the stability of Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection. We have not experienced any glitches or bugs.

I have not contacted technical support.

I am not familiar with the pricing.

I have researched Magic Software. I wanted a better understanding of the differences in the offerings. I allocated capital, I am trying to see if Magic is a good holding for our small-cap portfolio. 

It is abstract but I don't do any application development.

I would rate Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection an eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used to stop malicious emails with malicious attachments and can stop users from accessing sites or links that have a virus or malicious content. 

The security on offer is very good. It's great at preventing users from accessing malicious sites or email.

The filtering features are excellent. It allows you to any links an email might have. For example, when a user receives an email with a link, Mimecast takes that link and scans it, checking for any malicious content. If it's okay, then it passes on the email to the user. If it's not okay, or it's not sure about the content of the link, it then sends a notification to the user. It helps users to look at the user to see if it is a trusted source or not, and to decide if they want to open it or not.

The stability is very good.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The technical support is excellent.

There is always space for them to improve. As a user, the user interface of the management console could be upgraded, for example. They can definitely improve their management console interface.

The solution could always add more features and expand its offering.

I've been using the solution for about two and a half years or so.

It is a very stable solution. The last two half years that we have used the solution have been great. That said, four months ago they had some downtime for about three hours and it was something unexpected. It was not a good experience due to the fact that our main infrastructure had a problem for that entire time. It was not something that was quick or planned and it was during working hours for us. It was very difficult. We would have appreciated a heads up if it was meant to be planned.

Beyond that, we haven't really dealt with any bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze.

In just one group at our organization, we have about 200 users.

We don't have any plans to extend the usage. We are okay with the features and the modules already. We don't have any plans to change anything right now.

Technical support is good and to the point. They are helpful and responsive. We're quite happy with the level of service they provide to us.

Previously, we used Barracuda. We ran some tests and decided that Mimecast was a better option, which is why we ultimately decided to switch.

The initial setup was not complex or difficult. It was very, very easy. We had a problem initially as we were trying to figure things out and the Mimecast team was very, very supportive.

The deployment was fast. It took almost a week or something like that. It was very, very quick.

We did the implementation ourselves with our resources. We didn't get any help from a freelancer. There were no integrators or consultants involved.

I can't speak to the exact licensing costs. It's not an aspect of the solution I directly deal with. 

We are customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Mimecast.

I'd recommend the product to other users and companies. It's a good system and very effective.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

It is our spam filter, phishing filter, and executive impersonation filter. We have its latest version.

It does a good job for us, and its admin console is easy to use.

Their support should be improved. They are notorious for sending you to knowledge-based articles rather than actually talking to you, but that is, unfortunately, kind of becoming a trend with everything.

In terms of features, I haven't had any complaints. However, I don't like the fact they moved to a paid training subscription model. They used to have a lot of free webinars for training, but they have started to charge for them in the past year.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is stable. We didn't have any issues.

It is scalable. It is used across our entire enterprise. We probably have about 175 people, and they range from our CEO to all the way down to our warehouse people.

They always send you a link to an article rather than call you and talk to you about the problem you're reporting.

It was pretty complex. 

We had a third party do the setup for us.

We looked at Microsoft, Proofpoint, and Mimecast.

I would advise others to take a good look at it. There are a lot of layers to it, and there are parts of Mimecast that we don't even use yet. It is pretty much a beast when it comes to email security, but just make sure you take your time and have somebody who knows how to set it up. Give enough training to your admin. I manage several different pieces, and Mimecast is one of them. It is just an ongoing thing that requires monitoring all day and looking for phishing, impersonations, and things like that. You also have to set up different policies as they come about for block centers and permitted centers. It is almost a full-time job.

I would rate Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection an eight out of ten. I don't really have any complaints, and it does its job. 

Mimecast security in general, it's a SaaS service so they have their servers; they have everything on their side and we're just quote-unquote, passing the traffic through them, the email traffic through them.

Mimecast has multiple different solutions, all linked to the email. They recently added user info security training, but we're not using that. We, however, are using the archive piece and we're currently using their security threat protection. Regarding the threat protection — that does just fine. As far as the security goes — they had a big hiccup earlier this year where they were giving a false positive to a bunch of attachments. I'm not sure what happened on their side but for one week at least we had that issue. It took them a little over a week to resolve the issue. We also had some minor incidents after that, that they resolved.

Generally speaking, other than that event, it has been good. It doesn't block a hundred percent of the security threats received, but you have a lot of options to tag or even further analyze the messages received through Mimecast, either to a third-party solution or through an endpoint solution.

Everyone uses this solution at our company, whether they know it or not because you can leave it as transparent as you want it, or as user-demanding as you want it. There are specific items that only IT uses, but in general, this solution is used by one hundred percent of the company.

Recently they added a stress threat dashboard, which basically gives you metrics on the security side. It tells you how many threat detections were found, how many users were targeted, what were the specific threats discovered slash detected. This has proven to be a great tool for our company.

The piece that is most valuable from the Mimecast standpoint will be the sandboxing feature. They have a process where whenever they receive an email with an attachment, they process the attachment through a sandbox. Depending on your configuration, this is a customer-specific configuration, you can tell it to do a bunch of things. You can block the attachment, you can create a safe version of the attachment, or you can tell it to let it go or put it in a help queue for either user moderator or administrator review. 

The detection rates are an area for improvement. The other opportunity area I see with Mimecast is that when you're searching inside of the admin console and you detect malicious emails that bypass Mimecast security: let's say you had a hundred of those messages there. Mimecast doesn't have a way to group those and submit one single report to Mimecast. You have to do one at a time which is not really very conducive — it's very time-consuming.

Those are the main two points. If they work to fully resolve those two issues, that would make this an awesome tool. I mean, it's a good tool, but it would be even better.

The main feature that will help everyone will be a different way to submit phishing or malicious emails that went through security. That would be a very good feature I would like to see in the next release.

We've been using Mimecast since 2013.

Stability-wise, I would give this solution four and a half stars out of five.

The scalability is not even an issue — it's a SaaS solution.

The challenge with the Mimecast support is that unless you do a phone call, you're going to have to wait for someone to get back to you. Sometimes, you don't have the time to just call in, unless it's a critical matter that you need to resolve right away.

In general, they rely a lot on their knowledge base, which has very good information, but there are some specific items that are not either clear on the documentation or are not covered in the documentation. On average, I would say maybe we submit a ticket to them every other month — it's not a big deal on that side.

We used to use another solution, but we switched over to Mimecast because it has higher catching rates.

The setup was very straightforward for the actual Mimecast solution. If you're talking about the specifics of the security piece, the security piece does take you some time because, by default, it might block more emails than you want it to block, or let other emails get in than you want to get in. You have to create specific rules for impersonation attachment protection. If you're using URL protection, that's another whole thing to set up. 

We took care of the deployment in-house, with no outside help.

You can be up and running in no time. You just have to update a couple of your records. It's not the getting up, it's getting it where you want it to be. It's, quote-unquote, customizing the security levels of perfection you want. That's why it takes time — It's an ongoing task. It's not something that you should set up and let go of. You have to keep adding, removing, or tweaking the settings as needed.

I can say that the recently released threat dashboard gives you an idea of how successful you are being with the solution.

The licensing costs are per-user for the product that you get with them. It varies a lot. Then you have different discount tiers depending on the size of your organization or the partner you're using. I mean, there's a lot of quoting with the Mimecast solution. 

As far as additional costs are concerned, there are some for product licenses that you also have to pay — also, the support on Mimecast, the base support doesn't include email or phone calls, I think. In other words, there is a big fee for additional support on top of the per-user cost.

Mimecast has been in the market for a long time. It's a good tool if you want to simplify your operations. It's a good tool for removing on-prem appliances that otherwise you would need to do with the protection that Mimecast provides. I would recommend that you just keep that in mind.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine. If they corrected those two issues that I mentioned, then it would be an 11.

The solution is used for banking and finance clients. 

The most valuable feature is the DMARC Analyzer. 

External security features need improvement.

I have been using Mimecast Email Security for one year. 

It is a very stable solution.

It is a scalable security solution. I have one client with 5,000 users and another with 200 users. Mostly, SMBs use this solution. It is a bit slow for enterprises.

The setup is really easy. You do not need to install it on-premises. You can install it on the cloud with any desktop. The deployment takes one hour.

The solution is expensive.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.