I feel Proofpoint Email Protection is overpriced. I cannot say that the security level being provided does not justify the cost, but when comparing the similar level of security with other applications or security systems, it is overpriced. If Proofpoint could provide offers or discounts for customers who are already using the product or for new customers implementing it, along with some free services or add-ons, that would be helpful in terms of financial expense.

Proofpoint Email Protection has recently introduced AI functionality in terms of data security capabilities and protecting AI assistance from targeted attacks. This is important since everything is now related to AI. The solution is doing threat detection and real-time threat detection and response pretty well.

There are a few things I would like to see improved. Sometimes Proofpoint Email Protection takes time to analyze the workflow and the nature of the email. In this age of AI, the solution should analyze an email on the first receipt and determine whether it should pass or be marked as spam without checking previous data. Another improvement would be to have a more user-friendly dashboard. Additionally, if Proofpoint could add the same features in BCP as part of email protection in BCP, it would be helpful since I currently have to take a different add-on for BCP, and integrating it would save costs.

I cannot say that threats have increased or decreased with Proofpoint Email Protection because it depends on the mail flow. The solution captures and filters out all threats, and the email threats vary every day depending on how many users are receiving how many emails per day. Today there might be 1,000 emails, tomorrow 5,000, and the day after 500. Proofpoint Email Protection does its job by scanning all emails and threats are reduced to some extent. Since I am aware that virus definitions are updated every day, I cannot blame Proofpoint Email Protection if they take time to determine the nature of an email being received. There are sometimes emails that are false positives, and Proofpoint Email Protection is a bit strict in analyzing false positives, sometimes stopping emails that are actually required. It analyzes the previous nature of an email and if a template looks like an informational template or related to spam, it blocks it because it looks similar to one blocked earlier. However, the template might actually be required. If I receive the same template today that is also blocked by Proofpoint Email Protection, that particular template might be useful and should not be blocked. In such cases, I have to raise it as a false positive stating that this is something in use or my users use and should be released. When AI starts doing its work, it analyzes the email from a sender with a particular template and releases it, but if the same email and template come from another sender, it blocks it according to the policies.

A few things about how Proofpoint Email Protection can be improved include implementing artificial intelligence within their platform to start really understanding the organization that is using their product, what sort of emails they are expecting and if the emails that are being expected should be let in and if the emails that are not being expected should not be let in. I'll give you a further example for this. If someone just tries to send an email from a Gmail address, which is a free public service email service provider, then because anyone in the world can create a Gmail account, I think it is nice and good for Proofpoint Email Protection to actually first check and do a reality check if we have received an email from this address and look at the intent of the email to really see what the email is trying to do and then classify based on that. I still see there is a lack. Hence why I started this conversation with AI and hoping that Proofpoint Email Protection will bring AI in and to really start analyzing these emails, the intent, and whether they really fit the customer organization. We are a manufacturing company, so whether it really fits that profile.

I would say if we can get a better user experience from Proofpoint Email Protection products, that would be good. For example, other service providers that provide secure email gateway have the functionality where you can split promotional and bulk email and have them sent to a separate folder. I think if we can have that sort of feature, that would be great where Proofpoint Email Protection just keeps the important emails in the inbox folder and move everything else that is not really business related into a promotional, spam, bulk folder. This is an improvement that I would really like to see.

I give it an eight because I am expecting a lot more from Proofpoint Email Protection, more automations, more understanding of who their customer is, what sort of business they do, and what sort of email they are supposed to be receiving and letting through. I think the day when I really have only 1% of work to do and 99% is automated by whatever automation services Proofpoint Email Protection uses would be ideal.

I think I have covered any other improvements needed for Proofpoint Email Protection pretty well right from AI to splitting emails based on priorities. I think I have given some pretty broad and good examples.

The areas that have room for improvement in Proofpoint Email Protection include their cost of ownership, which is fairly high. To manage and run all their products, I have to list and manage administrators in seven or eight different places. That is too many places to keep track of since for this tool I have to go to one location, and for another tool I have to go to a different location. They need to simplify the administration management of administrators and consolidate that into one place for all their products. Access to all the different products is very scattered. For some products I go to one URL, and for different products I go to a different URL. They have a threat URL that has most of their products in it, but not all. They need to simplify the interface to show all the products I have access to in one location.

There are many things that could be improved, but once you are very well-known about this application, you could perform that improvement plan. There are many scenarios where I have worked with Proofpoint Email Protection where a requirement was not fulfilled due to the limitation of the product.

For example, we have Report Phish automation. With Proofpoint Email Protection, we can configure Report Phish and forward the email to any email addresses or shared mailboxes that we provide in the configuration. That email is forwarded as is with whatever the user reports as a phishing email. However, some organizations do not want the reported phishing email to go as is into their ticketing tool because it might contain malicious attachments and malicious links that are not required to go into their internal organization. Proofpoint Email Protection has that limitation. They cannot forward or restrict, but could forward only limited information such as some header information, sender subject details, or only limited information. As it is, the email can be forwarded, not as limited information.

Proofpoint TRAP solution also has limitations. It cannot create alert notifications for some specific requirements because Proofpoint works the way it is designed, and if you want it to work based on our requirement, that should not be possible. There is a scope of limitations here.

There are many improvements that should be made. First, they should work on their false positive minimization. Proofpoint generally takes all emails, investigates them, and classifies them. There are many situations where legit emails are blocked because that domain is found to be under a malicious category somehow, but actually it is not. False positive minimization could be improved, and they could enhance their other applications or solutions. There are many things that they could improve from each application and each portal.

While ingesting the logs into our SIEM tool, most organizations don't have the capability to buy the email gateway as it is quite an expensive one. It would be better that if I am providing a service as a SOC, then it is better for the client to buy a premium version where I can ingest the logs into Splunk. However, in Splunk, I should have the ability to check all the fields. All the fields should get ingested. In a majority of the cases, I can see that event names are getting dropped because of this parsing issue. That is the one thing they can improve on with email gateways.

I chose nine for Proofpoint Email Protection because I feel that by using that product, every organization can be safe from phishing and spam emails. I didn't rate it a 10 because there will always be room for improvement. Nowadays the attacks are getting more and more sophisticated. The attackers are trying to gain some more information about the target, then they will send an email. Email gateways also need to be improved in that way, where they should be able to detect more sophisticated phishing emails.

I believe there is still room for improvement. I do not want to give Proofpoint Email Protection a perfect score because all solutions always have room for growth.

I consider the scalability of Proofpoint Email Protection to be high. For instance, sending logs and reading logs when trying to send them to a SIEM is still somewhat limited. While I can get the data, it is not fully integrated with different solutions like CrowdStrike, where I need the data but cannot read it due to the lack of proper implementation.

I believe Proofpoint Email Protection could be improved by integrating more applications for sending logs to SIEMs and adding more vendors. I understand there is still room for improvement, and time will likely bring more enhancements.

There are user interface complexities that require integration with a SOC team, which needs time and training.

Reporting customization is a strong built-in feature, but custom report creation can limit comparison with some SIEM tools.

Integration effort requires additional configuration or tuning in a hybrid way, particularly in non-Microsoft environments.

False positives can occur with gray emails where some legitimate business emails from bulk vendors may occasionally be flagged. We can fine-tune our policies and allow lists to address this.

TAP and TRAP are often separate licenses, which can increase cost, although these are easily adaptable features.

The areas of Proofpoint Email Protection that could be improved or enhanced involve the email rewrite functionality. It can be aggressive sometimes, rewriting a lot of very benign content. Finding a balance is key because sometimes it blocks things that are harmless. Proofpoint Email Protection tends to err more on the side of security, which can sometimes impact operations, but I would rather have an operational impact than face a breach. There are pros and cons to that, but I would suggest maintaining a good balance between security protection and operational impact.

I have not seen specific outcomes or metrics since implementing Proofpoint Email Protection, such as a reduction in phishing incidents or improved response time.

Proofpoint Email Protection can improve in how it analyzes alerts by using more AI within its product suite to eliminate repeat alerts, such as filtering down the same attack to generate only one alert. In summary, using AI more within the platform would reduce our workload.

I would suggest advanced phishing training that uses AI to generate phishing training simulations and to catch and filter more phishing attacks. Proofpoint Email Protection feels like just the baseline approach, which is very static.

Most users might be confused why Proofpoint Email Protection is providing two solutions. They should quickly transition from the old portal to the new one to avoid customer confusion regarding the availability of two portals in the market.

I don't think there are many areas for improvement. The only things I mentioned earlier regarding Google Workspace documentation could be better, and they are already working on the two consoles. Everything else is lined up.

From an MSP perspective, multi-tenant administration could be improved. Managing multiple customers from a single, unified console would significantly enhance efficiency when one administrator supports several environments.

More granular permissions or options within the Targeted Attack Prevention dashboard would be nice because when there are known threats detected and emails are quarantined post-delivery, we have no actual way to gather further forensic evidence within that detection. Further or granular options to manage anything within Targeted Attack Prevention would be beneficial.

Regarding the Unified Admin Console in the protection workbench, the Unified Console provides access to four different dashboards from here, including Threat Protection Workbench, Email Protection, Targeted Attack Prevention Dashboard, Threat Response, and Unified Management. However, there are a couple of things missing. We use URL Isolation, and the Proofpoint Isolation Portal does not appear under the protection unified dashboard, which is a problem. It is annoying because I have to save a long bookmark and use it whenever I need to access it. Apart from that, we also use Proofpoint's CASB solution, which is the Cloud Access Security Broker solution, and it has a separate dashboard that is not linked to the Protection Workbench or the Admin Portal where everything is shown as a collective under the catalog. Those two portals are not appearing here for some reason. I would very much like to have them here, as that is one of those things that annoys me now and then.

There are a couple of things about Proofpoint Email Protection I do not prefer. We have identified a couple of issues, and in any software product, you always have some troubles that need to be fixed. I would say their support has not been completely correct in handling things as we have expected. As an enterprise, we have high demands on the services, and if we have to wait for something like a week or weeks, it is not acceptable; we need solutions in one or two days sometimes because if there is spam going around, you cannot wait weeks. You have to fix it immediately.

For Proofpoint Email Protection, when it comes to support, there are times when they do not meet the SLAs for support, mostly on Fridays. If I open a case on a Friday, they will take more time than the agreed SLA. Another area for improvement is that the solution does not currently support Infrastructure as Code. We use Terraform in other security solutions to automate the configurations and to guarantee that we have a copy in our repository. The retention period for the logs is just 30 days, and it would be beneficial to have 60 days or 90 days to analyze the logs. Additionally, the pricing is expensive. Apart from that, I do not have other cons.

With Proofpoint Email Protection, there are some solutions that I consider expensive. We conducted a proof of concept, and at the end, the SOC team was involved, including our CISO. We decided not to purchase those solutions because they are too expensive. It is not a cheap product overall.

There are areas that have room for improvement in Proofpoint Email Protection, particularly regarding the interface, since I used the old legacy interface so much. I think they are making strides in that direction already, so I would say continue there. I am not sure how completed the new unified interface is or if they have actually finished and rolled all of the features up in there or not. That is a good area for continued focus. Proofpoint Email Protection was a very powerful product. The older legacy user interface just took a little to work with, and the new unified interface, as it was able to do more and more of the functionality of the old one, the product just got easier and easier to use.

There is nothing in particular that needs improvement; I am very happy with the solution. There is a bit of a learning curve to get started in the unified admin console in Threat Protection Workbench, but once I am familiar with the settings and the tool itself, the day-to-day experience becomes very easy.

I would like to see improvements in Proofpoint Email Protection's portal as it is sometimes slow.

The performance of Proofpoint Email Protection's portal needs to be more responsive, and we would like more features added to the admin interface.

It would be better if I could submit a false negative without having to download the email message from the user's inbox.

The addition of not having to submit a false negative email from a user's inbox would be a beneficial feature. If Proofpoint Email Protection worked out their portal configuration into a single pane, it would be appreciated.

There are a couple of pain points regarding uploading false negatives and other related issues. We don't have the integration with the messaging applications yet, so it hasn't achieved full coverage, though I understand that depends on our organization.

There have been a few cases where an obvious phishing email has not been blocked, but perhaps Proofpoint Email Protection was still learning and needed some extra time to figure out that the email was malicious. The detection piece could be improved a little bit more. If one email goes through and somebody clicks it, that's the end of it, regardless of whether further emails were blocked. If Proofpoint Email Protection could detect that first email at the right moment and block it right away, that would be great.

I would appreciate some additional dashboards, enhancements showing the trends, and some reporting. I don't have a lot of complaint about Proofpoint Email Protection interface. It's pretty basic, but I'd like to see some GUI improvements, just from a visual perspective, not from the functional perspective, but maybe from a visual perspective.

I think it would be nice to separate the admin and the security console in Threat Protection Workbench for managing security operations from a segregation of duties perspective. Since we are a smaller organization, I do have access to both, which is okay. But in a bigger organization, they might need a different dashboard for admin and the SOC analyst or the user, again from a segregation of duties perspective. I think it would be nice to have the option to have both in one or maybe split them out, depending on the organization.

Some of the old portal features of Proofpoint Email Protection are missing in the new portal, so some of the settings could be modernized. The TRAP mail gateway product of Proofpoint Email Protection also has settings missing from its cloud deployment.

The unified admin console in Threat Protection Workbench for managing security operations is still confusing, with many different portals and changing names making it difficult to find all of the features across different products.

To improve Proofpoint Email Protection, I suggest improving the UI from the pod to align with the new admin.proofpoint.com interface, as the pod is still existing for a reason, but the interface is definitely outdated.

In addition to the UI improvements, I would appreciate an increase in the speed of the tasks being processed on the pod.

The management portal of Proofpoint Email Protection has an outdated UI that requires an update for better usability.

Additionally, reduction of false positives in TAP alerts is necessary, necessitating constant updating and submission of documentation for training Proofpoint Email Protection's AI agents.

One thing we have been discussing with Proofpoint is tone-based blocking. We receive a lot of unsolicited emails wherein the tone is not appropriate; it is malicious and abusive, but the text itself appears clean. There is no profanity, no links, no images, and nothing malicious, but tone-based blocking using AI would be a great option.

I feel there is still room for improvement because many features are in POD and not yet available in the Admin Portal. The Admin Portal is really easy to use, but we are struggling with many policies in the Admin Portal. We need to have AI capability shown in the Admin Portal rather than just discussed or operating in the background.

I find my experience with the unified admin console in Threat Protection Workbench for managing security operations much easier to use because of Threat Workbench. However, there is a visibility problem where all emails are visible to everyone who logs into Threat Workbench, and that should not happen. Additionally, many features shown in seminars about AI are not yet enabled for us, so whatever we see, we are not able to experience it in our gateway yet.

I believe they still need to improve by consolidating some portals, as currently, you have to log in separately to a few of them.

We are definitely seeing fewer escalations with Proofpoint Email Protection in that many more malicious emails are getting blocked right at the gate instead of requiring remediation after the fact.

I believe if the GUI were more user-friendly for people using it for the first time, or if there were more training available for end users to share with them, that would be good.

At this stage, there is nothing that I can think of to improve Proofpoint Email Protection, and I am happy to see that they're continuously innovating.

At this time, I do not wish to add anything else about the features or any small tweaks that could make my experience even better.

I cannot think of anything that Proofpoint Email Protection can improve upon.

It became very expensive due to the nature of local circumstances, and I may advise Proofpoint to adjust marketing solutions based on each country.

From my experience using Proofpoint Email Protection, it has been quite helpful, although there is always room for improvement. I currently do not have any specific improvements to mention, but if I need changes in the future, I would bring up those ideas.

Phishing detection & Response capabilities could improve further to match some of the capabilities offered by competitors. Proofpoint could expand its PDR capabilities to improve its efficiency inside the SOC

One major threat is QR code phishing, along with TOAD (Telephone-Oriented Attack Delivery). TOAD attacks don't include links, URLs, or attachments in emails. Instead, attackers try to trick you into calling them, often by offering something enticing like a 50% discount on football matches. Once you call, they may try to get your two-factor authentication code or send malicious links to your personal email, bypassing security controls. Proofpoint has consistently detected and prevented these kinds of deceptive attacks.

Sometimes it doesn't detect actual spam emails, and sometimes it catches normal emails, which is not spam. So I think the filtering should be improved in the future. I believe Proofpoint is already working on that.

The pricing is also something that could be improved. It's literally high.

AI is not yet fully enabled in this tool. Hopefully, in the future, it will work.

The support team was a bit slow. It takes months to implement the next feature.

So I'd like to see faster support.

The whole configuration management piece of the product requires some work, as it is one of the areas where the tool has certain shortcomings. Though it is an easy-to-install product, it might be difficult to get the process right for some users. The basics related to the installation process are simple to understand, but it takes a lot of effort to figure out areas to use this tool effectively if you want to do something above the basic level.

The high cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I would like to see a lot of premium content in the product moved to a lower band because the basic version of the tool is relatively cheap compared to the sophisticated versions with additional costs.

One person who works full-time needs to take care of the maintenance part.

The product's deployment is complex and requires technical knowledge.

The price could be improved.

In terms of improvement, I have some concerns regarding the effectiveness of Proofpoint's phishing protection. There is room for improvement in detecting and preventing phishing attacks. While the solution performs well in some aspects, it struggles with phishing threats. There are other solutions on the market that do a good job with that.

The stability and UI are the two areas of the solution with certain shortcomings that need improvement.

The flexibility of the solution can be improved. We have a history of a white labeling project that we completed with one of the largest worldwide telecom companies. We encountered a major issue with some blending cases, as it was almost impossible to meet the blending of colors or requirements expected by our customers within the white labeling project. This is not only a technical issue, but from a marketing perspective, it is also very important. A white hyperlink means that we have prepared a dedicated infrastructure specifically labeled. All parts of our service had to be labeled with a very specific brand, and it was very challenging to make it all happen.

Unfortunately, the whole product is going downhill right now, ever since they were sold to Thoma Bravo. We're constantly having problems with stability and the product in general.

Even their sales and support is deteriorating as well. I can't even get them to quote me for the next year, possibly because they are still in disarray from their sale.

Because of these issues, we are likely going to move away from it soon. I would prefer not to change, but I might not have a choice, especially if they can't even send me the proper quotes for everything.

The solution's server console and cluster dashboard have been the same for four years so need to be upgraded. There is no feature-rich dashboard so searching emails is cumbersome and slow. The way Facebook, Gmail, and LinkedIn looked five years ago is not the same as today. Everything today is feature-rich and user-friendly.

Sometimes it detects false positives. 

We'd like the sandbox to integrate with the on-prem device. 

It needs to identify the paths and signatures. We'd like advanced machine learning for detection. 

We'd like the have more lunch and learns to get more out of the solution. 

We'd like to have the ability to create more customized reports.

It would be ideal if we could customize exceptions more effectively and have more control over blacklisting and whitelisting. 

The solution can be expensive. 

I have some concerns about Proofpoint mail flow rules. It's not smart.

Proofpoint has a lot of false alarms. Even their mail flow rules are not the best thing. Mimecast and Microsoft Office 365 are better than them. Many emails are marked as spam unnecessarily. I've had issues and have had to open many tickets. 

The false positives are an issue. There are many false positives that come in, which you report to Proofpoint. Sometimes they take time to update those things. They say there's an option that we can use to report false positives. However, it is not a quick remedy. You go and report it, and still, you have to take action on it and clear those emails getting blocked. It's too cumbersome. 

We don't have the option to scan a password-protected attachment. I have to either blindly whitelist it as it will get blocked since an email with attachments normally gets scanned. We'd like to have some mechanism in place where we can scan these protected attachments or whitelist the domain.

Proofpoint Email Protection could improve on the training. Every organization is different and to fine-tune it to block everything properly there needs to be better training. Sometimes it can block some of the information it shouldn't.

In a feature release, phishing blocking could improve.

It can be improved pricing-wise. One downfall of the product from the SMB side is the pricing. Currently, everybody can't afford it. Everybody wants a Mercedes, but not everyone has the budget for it.

I want Security Awareness Training in there as a package deal. A lot of companies are starting to value email security a little bit more and take it a little bit more seriously, and the great product that we link together with a lot of these sales is a training product called Security Awareness Training. It is an upsell that we do with Proofpoint, and it is definitely something that I recommend everybody with email security to look into. It would be great if Security Awareness Training is included with the email security.

Proofpoint Email Protection could improve the Mail Trace feature and make navigation easier.

The email DLP portion could be a bit easier.

Integration and filtering out who you want and don't want to have integrated ID could be improved. Sometimes it takes longer for an email sent through Proofpoint Email Protection to reach the client.

So far, the protection on offer is okay. There are no improvements needed at this time. 

The solution could lower its price. 

Proofpoint Email Protection could improve by allowing more customization of the reports, such as exceptions and black-and-white lists.

There is room for improvement. One aspect that could be enhanced is finding a better way to follow outgoing mail. This would be particularly useful in situations where customers or suppliers claim they did not receive our messages.

Proofpoint Email Protection could improve by reducing the price.

Integration for reporting needs to be improved, it's a little complex. Right now we have integrated with Power BI to get logs and information from Proofpoint. That has to be improved with the API and there are also latency issues which need to be simplified and improved. Those are the areas I've observed that need improvement. 

It was easier to use Microsoft than Proofpoint.

We had some issues with their sales consultant. We got into a dispute and he ended up leaving the company. It's unknown if he was unhappy being at the company, or if it was a reflection of the company, but I can say that their sales consultant was not good.

I think they have everything that I would want in the advanced version.

There are certain things, I would want. I would want better spear phishing protection in the essentials package.

The Secure Mail aspect should have an Outlook add-in, instead of an external dashboard that outside users have to access. If we send a payment to one of our customers or an ACH or a form to fill out, they have to go through this entire subscription process on a separate website to read the secure mail.

It should be like Ignite, where you can access the internal portal so then our customers aren't having to go through all these hoops just to read an email that we're trying to send them securely. That would be the one thing I would change. Basically, the Secure Mail portal wouldn't be its own portal; it would be an add-in.

Not one of them is one hundred percent when it comes to reputation scores. It doesn't matter which solution — none of them are. Not one of them is a hundred percent on false negatives or false positives.

Proofpoint scores way up there along with Cisco. You used to have a choice with Proofpoint which one you use. They may be using multiples now, too. Proofpoint is the main tool for blocking spam because it denies the connection altogether.

I know for a fact that I can set Proofpoint up to what they call SYN attacks. SYN attacks basically open a connection, and then a handshake starts, and thousands of connections form. So, Proofpoint waits for a timeout to occur and then allows you to tie up all your connections, which is basically an out-of-service attack. They have something similar in Office 365, too.

Still, the reputation services, the antivirus modules, none of them are a hundred percent when it comes to false positives or false negatives.

It's the whole industry. The SMTP protocol needs to be totally rewritten. It was designed in the fifties or sixties. Changing it would be very, very difficult.

They put band-aids on it for security — that's essentially what's happened with that. That email is not secure by design because it's still using an old design from many moons ago.

It has too many screens. It is kind of a conglomeration of products. In other words, they built product A, product B, and product C, and they are yet to integrate them into a single administrative console. I would certainly like to see a more seamless administrative interface. 

I would also like to see them include more bang for the buck, by including features like email fraud protection, rather than making their product so piecemeal, where you are buying little pieces. I agree with the idea of having multiple tiers or layers, but maybe as small, medium, and large, as opposed to an a la carte menu.

The solution can be improved by including a real-time block list and giving the user more control over customizations. 

Proofpoint Email Protection has a new approach to email security with its API feature. Currently, it only works with Office 365. In the future, it would be beneficial if it also works with Gmail, as Check Point is currently the only brand that has API email security for Gmail. It would be beneficial if Proofpoint Email Protection could add this integration, they would be more competitive with other vendors.

One customer mentioned that the user interface for custom configuration could be improved. They stated that while the dashboard looks visually pleasing, they would like the configuration page to have a similar aesthetic appeal.

The solution should add post-sales training. There is no issue with the product itself but education could be improved because no information related to implementations is available. We can find sales and pre-sales training but are in need of post-sales training similarly to what is offered by other vendors. 

If we know how the product works, we can implement it. Sometimes, customers ask the solution to handle implementations and that is costly. We would like the training to fully handle implementations and save our customers money. 

The accessibility of Proofpoint Email Protection, particularly access to product trials, could be improved. It's hard to get a trial for Proofpoint Email Protection, and many customers prefer not just to do the POC or demo but try the product out, including Proofpoint Email Protection add-ons.

In the product's next release, I want more email servers added, such as Lotus Domino, rather than Proofpoint Email Protection focusing on just Microsoft Office 365 Exchange and Gmail.

The price policy needs to be better. We'd still like lower pricing. 

The initial setup is complex. 

The only downside with Proofpoint Email Protection is the cost.

We have some use cases that haven't been dealt with yet, so that could be improved.

The incident reporting on offer needs to be improved. It's lacking right now. It should be on the platform somewhere.

The largest complaint that we hear from our customers is that there is no local support. We wait for the internet from the US to connect.

If the customer has a P1 or P2 issue, they need someone to immediately focus on the solution. We have been trying to build a team to support our local customers because there is no local support available from Proofpoint.

I am not sure if there is anything available as a SaaS offering, but that would be good. 

Also, the threat intelligence of phishing emails is an additional feature that we expect from Proofpoint.

They do not have an on-demand scan for the internal viruses and internal users, and they don't have a scan for the exchange server against viruses and spam as Symantec does.

Also, they are not able to scan multiple engines as McAfee does.

I would like to see a feature included as an email security gateway the way that Symantec does.

The solution needs to better detect emails that don't have a malicious payload. They need to ensure those that have a link to a malicious Google Drive or something like that are captured.

We find the cost to be prohibitive.

Their smart search needs to be much more intuitive and flexible.

The search functionality is quite small. It could be a bit more in-depth. Right now, it's a bit simple.

The solution could be improved with the addition of PLP and email encryption features.

Proofpoint should have better integration with complex environments that need more than one instance of Proofpoint, as there are issues with nested instances.

Proofpoint Email Protection's interface is confusing and could be improved.

Proofpoint Email Protection is an expensive solution.

You only receive one model in Proofpoint Email Protection and the other ones you have to purchase at a high price. There should be more available with the solution and additional models should be less expensive.

The administrator that manages the service should be better in their role. They don't have enough people to manage the service well.

The solution needs to integrate with the owner's labeling solution. Without this integration, the solution is not feasible.