We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Email and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."Safe attachments, safe links, policies, and the ability to protect from zero-day threats are the most valuable features."
"Does a thorough job of examining email and URLs for malicious content."
"The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"At the moment we are satisfied with this product. It's a stable, scalable, and resilient solution for us."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"Some of the valuable features on the email side are anti-phishing, anti-malware, and Safe Links."
"I like its investigation capabilities, as that is what is most important to me. It is fairly simple with a user-friendly interface."
"The most valuable feature is the different content filters we are using, such as DKIM."
"What I find the most valuable about Cisco Secure Email is that the logs are not that difficult to see even if you're not used to them. The logs are reasonably readable and diagnosing the problem is not too hard with them."
"It integrates with Active Directory and we can limit specific users to using specific applications."
"It's flexible. There are a lot of rules and policies that can be easily applied for certain employees or certain mailboxes."
"There are a lot of filters for scam emails and things like that work out of the box. You can also use the antivirus features. I like its features."
"It provides good IT assistance."
"The system provides our service desk with the means to troubleshoot email delivery issues with ease."
"Initially, the most valuable feature for us was the SenderBase Reputation, because that reduced the number of emails that were even considered by the system by a huge number..."
"It’s pretty stable after you get up and running."
"It has protected clients against cyberattacks."
"The solution’s administration is easy."
"The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Web Security is creating the easy to install further policies that are deployed through the Forcepoint security manual at some stage. Just drag and drop and the policies are there."
"I have found the web content filtering and malware filter the most valuable."
"I like the product's scalability and stability."
"It allowed our company to not worry about the security of a page, but talk more about the content and the productivity of specific types of web categories."
"The critical role is web URL filtering."
"About eight months ago, we started to measure the quantity of phishing and spam that we have been receiving, and it has been increasing a lot. That means that protection for our email is not as good as we were expecting."
"The pre-sales cost calculations could be more transparent."
"They can improve their security in a way where a customer can know if all their attachments are safe or not to open through a report. The solution does its job perfectly, but it never reports to the customer whether those attachments have been stopped before or not."
"One area for improvement is support, in terms of being able to reach them and, especially, technical support for configuration."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 should improve the troubleshooting tools. It's unclear whether the device is blocked at the firewall level or at the device itself. The granularity needed for troubleshooting is currently lacking. From my perspective, Microsoft should address this issue to benefit many users who likely share the same sentiment."
"We noticed that from time to time, Microsoft's stability does have problems. Sometimes the service goes up and down. Sometimes they change without prior notice."
"The visibility for the weaknesses in the system and unauthorized access can be improved."
"The product must provide better malware detection."
"The hardware is not up to the mark. Two to three times a year we have complete downtime."
"The area of license renewal should be improved. We normally renew our license every year. There is a feature called smart licensing, and I switched from the legacy mode to the smart licensing mode because of what I thought smart licensing does. I thought it would make licensing renewal seamless and very swift, but ever since I've switched to smart licensing, each time I want to renew my license, it is a whole lot of headache. The process is not smooth, and I had to keep calling Cisco TAC to see how the issue can be resolved. At one point, I wanted to revert back to the legacy mode, but I can't revert. Once you switch from the legacy mode to the smart licensing mode, you can't revert. They should improve on the visibility of the smart licensing mode so that it can indeed be smart and easier to use for the license renewal every year. That is one challenge."
"I have some frustrations with the user experience in the interface, specifically with regard to making a list of people for whom I want to allow email access."
"The user interface needs some improvement to become more user-friendly. The graphics could be better. It's designed more for a technical user rather than a business user."
"We have occasionally had hardware problems because we are using an appliance-based solution, but that might change. We may consider going to virtual systems."
"My opinion on the licensing of this solution is that it is a mess that needs sorting out. I am not particularly bothered by pricing as I administer it and make recommendations for people to buy or not to buy."
"The user interface could be updated."
"There could be additional DLP functionality for it."
"The reporting must be improved."
"The automation lifecycle, integration, and export functionality could all be improved."
"The performance issues in the product are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Database synchronization failures"
"In the on-premises version, I don't like the deployment and structuring of the device."
"But the deployment could be easier. It might take from one day to three days. Usually, that involves an engineer from the vendor and a working team at the enterprise."
"I am looking forward to the full integration of the endpoints that they offer for web security and DLP."
"We have had latency issues."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Email is ranked 2nd in Email Security with 56 reviews while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is ranked 5th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 47 reviews. Cisco Secure Email is rated 8.4, while Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Email writes "Has effortless spam control, improves security posture, and frees up our IT department's time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway writes "Simple to set up, reliable, and offers great reporting". Cisco Secure Email is most compared with Trellix Collaboration Security, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Fortinet FortiMail, Proofpoint Email Protection and Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense, whereas Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Symantec Proxy and Fortinet FortiProxy.
We monitor all Email Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.