Senior Managing Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Jun 25, 2026
Mimecast Advanced Email Security can be improved by integrating artificial intelligence to process emails more effectively, providing summaries that would be substantially helpful. The user interface is good as it is, so I have nothing much to add regarding improvements. The accuracy of Mimecast Advanced Email Security is good, but I cannot solely rely on AI accuracy for actions, as AI is not infallible. It analyzes patterns but sometimes overlooks suspicious indicators. While Mimecast Advanced Email Security uses a precautionary method to block emails, the process is good but still requires fine-tuning based on user experience.
System Engineer II at a media company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Jun 24, 2026
Regarding how Mimecast Advanced Email Security can be improved, I think Mimecast Advanced Email Security is continuously improving email security, but I would like them to include a feature as soon as possible that detects when someone spoofs the display name. If my name is ABC, then someone could use the ABC name and send the email to a user. If that email ID is not from Cimpress, it should create some warning indicating this is an external email, not from your company. I have no additional comments about the needed improvements. Everything is pretty good. What we pay and what we get from Mimecast Advanced Email Security is really good, with no issues.
The improvement needed is not necessarily in the product itself, but rather around how other organizations have evolved. The DLP discussion is no longer limited to email; it has gone to border level with companies like Zscaler, Netskope, and Palo Alto giving the complete full-stack SASE setup. When somebody has a SASE setup, then Mimecast Advanced Email Security DLP might not even be needed at a point in time. Mimecast Advanced Email Security needs to improve in this area because they are only focusing on a particular set of problems which is on email and human risk, whereas companies that need a slightly bigger picture will look elsewhere. The second thing is when you buy an XDR provider, they give you a complete holistic story around it, showing what has happened, which email somebody has clicked on, whether there have been any changes, and whether there is any network activity. You get a holistic picture. When pushing Mimecast Advanced Email Security to end customers, people are more often saying that they would rather buy XDR from another provider because the story when an analyst sees is complete in terms of what they see, whereas they only get an email story from Mimecast Advanced Email Security. Mimecast Advanced Email Security has to improve there. Companies like Abnormal AI cover more on UEBA and user behavior, and there are many things for Mimecast Advanced Email Security to improve in this area as well. It is less of a technology issue; they are doing very well on email. The conversation for them to have is on how to get into a broader level or how to get a tie-up to become a broader supplier. At least from a service provider landscape, I can say that.
Certainly, the primary area needing improvement is Mimecast's customer support. Our experience as Mimecast customers has been less than satisfactory. Even when raising a priority ticket, the response time is unacceptably long, often taking around five to six hours. This level of service is disappointing. Additionally, there have been recurring service disruptions in the UK region, leading to extended email delays due to various service issues. This year alone, we've encountered such problems on approximately four occasions.
Learn what your peers think about Mimecast Advanced Email Security. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: July 2026.
Mimecast Email Security protects organizations against phishing, malware, business email compromise, and impersonation attacks, with detection built on 20 years of experience and over 1.3 billion emails inspected daily. It's available as a secure email gateway (MX-based) for full control over complex, multi-region environments, or via API integration with Microsoft 365, which deploys in hours with no MX changes. Administrators get a single console for policy management, monitoring external...
Mimecast Advanced Email Security can be improved by integrating artificial intelligence to process emails more effectively, providing summaries that would be substantially helpful. The user interface is good as it is, so I have nothing much to add regarding improvements. The accuracy of Mimecast Advanced Email Security is good, but I cannot solely rely on AI accuracy for actions, as AI is not infallible. It analyzes patterns but sometimes overlooks suspicious indicators. While Mimecast Advanced Email Security uses a precautionary method to block emails, the process is good but still requires fine-tuning based on user experience.
Regarding how Mimecast Advanced Email Security can be improved, I think Mimecast Advanced Email Security is continuously improving email security, but I would like them to include a feature as soon as possible that detects when someone spoofs the display name. If my name is ABC, then someone could use the ABC name and send the email to a user. If that email ID is not from Cimpress, it should create some warning indicating this is an external email, not from your company. I have no additional comments about the needed improvements. Everything is pretty good. What we pay and what we get from Mimecast Advanced Email Security is really good, with no issues.
The improvement needed is not necessarily in the product itself, but rather around how other organizations have evolved. The DLP discussion is no longer limited to email; it has gone to border level with companies like Zscaler, Netskope, and Palo Alto giving the complete full-stack SASE setup. When somebody has a SASE setup, then Mimecast Advanced Email Security DLP might not even be needed at a point in time. Mimecast Advanced Email Security needs to improve in this area because they are only focusing on a particular set of problems which is on email and human risk, whereas companies that need a slightly bigger picture will look elsewhere. The second thing is when you buy an XDR provider, they give you a complete holistic story around it, showing what has happened, which email somebody has clicked on, whether there have been any changes, and whether there is any network activity. You get a holistic picture. When pushing Mimecast Advanced Email Security to end customers, people are more often saying that they would rather buy XDR from another provider because the story when an analyst sees is complete in terms of what they see, whereas they only get an email story from Mimecast Advanced Email Security. Mimecast Advanced Email Security has to improve there. Companies like Abnormal AI cover more on UEBA and user behavior, and there are many things for Mimecast Advanced Email Security to improve in this area as well. It is less of a technology issue; they are doing very well on email. The conversation for them to have is on how to get into a broader level or how to get a tie-up to become a broader supplier. At least from a service provider landscape, I can say that.
Allow modification of potentially dangerous hyperlinks to be converted into either text or image instead of rejecting the message.
Certainly, the primary area needing improvement is Mimecast's customer support. Our experience as Mimecast customers has been less than satisfactory. Even when raising a priority ticket, the response time is unacceptably long, often taking around five to six hours. This level of service is disappointing. Additionally, there have been recurring service disruptions in the UK region, leading to extended email delays due to various service issues. This year alone, we've encountered such problems on approximately four occasions.