Cisco Secure Email Reviews

I primarily focus on managing secure settings for our organization. About ninety percent of my work involves overseeing security measures. I begin by concentrating on the operational site and then extend my attention to other aspects, such as network sites. As I progress, I tackle new tasks that come my way, often centered around enhancing security and efficiency.

The primary consideration for adopting a new product revolves around its most valuable features, and this assessment is product-specific. In our organization, we heavily rely on this evaluation to determine if the product aligns with our needs.

Capital expenditure is a significant consideration, and the impact on major expenditures prompts a careful analysis before onboarding the new product. We evaluate its suitability for our organization, assessing whether it aligns with our requirements.

Many smaller businesses opt for more cost-effective solutions, such as Gmail or Hotmail accounts, instead of investing in Cisco Secure Email, given its higher cost. While theoretical knowledge, especially in terms of POC and PNA technology, is commendable, the challenge lies in the practical application.

We have been working with it for the past five months.

The stability depends on the volume of the workload.

It provides a high scalability. Our customers are enterprise businesses. I would rate is eight out of ten.

It provides good customer support services. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

The ease of deployment is contingent upon the size of the organization, specifically the number of users and titles involved. If the deployment is for a smaller organization, with a straightforward configuration, it can be completed quickly, often within a month or two. In contrast, for larger enterprises with a significant number of users, numerous branches, and a complex organizational structure, the deployment timeline can extend to six to eight months.

It is a relatively expensive option compared to other alternatives. I would rate it eight out of ten.

While Cisco is a preferred choice for larger enterprises, its products, especially in the realm of security, tend to be more expensive due to their advanced features. Many organizations commonly rely on Microsoft Outlook for their email needs. Transitioning to Cisco security solutions, including Cisco SecureMail, requires careful consideration and typically involves a learning stage. The decision between traditional hardware and virtual machines (VMs) for deploying solutions like Cisco Secure Mail often depends on financial considerations. VMs are generally more cost-effective compared to dedicated hardware, leading industries to increasingly favor VM deployment. The choice is particularly relevant when the server's capabilities are robust enough to meet organizational needs. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

We use Cisco email security against threats such as phishing and malware and block weaponized URLs. Cisco provides a cloud solution, along with the appliance, and a hybrid solution is also there. We deploy the solution as per the customer's requirements.

The solution is very robust because it talks to Cisco Talos. Talos is the number one threat detection engine, the most trustworthy and used globally. That's one strong reason we back our products. Not only do we use it on our premises, but this is the product's main USP when we sell it.

Cross-platform is one major pain point. Many of our clients use an open-source Linux system. These components cannot provide for any Ubuntu or any Linux open-source system, and that's where we get stuck most of the time. Previously, we were doing a POC for Cisco Umbrella, and we got stuck at the point where the customer had almost 200 to 300 of his endpoints, almost 80% of his workforce, working on Linux. This was both on the server and roaming user sides, and Cisco has no solution for Ubuntu. We have raised this suggestion many times when interacting with Cisco during seminars and webinars we've attended. However, we only got feedback from them that they will introduce that feature very soon with their Cisco AnyConnect agent. But it's still only available for Windows and Mac.

I've used this solution for one year.

The product is stable. There have been no complaints from the customers. Fine-tuning is important, which will come whenever you go live, especially for larger domains where customers have 1,000 or 2,000 email IDs and multiple domains. That is the only challenge where we have to fine-tune the policies. But the product is stable.

Cisco Email Security's scalability is good. We have had a couple of cases where the user increased the licenses. There is no challenge to scalability. For the past year, there have been four to five customers to whom we have sold the product.

Cisco's technical support is excellent. Whenever we contact tech support, the hierarchy starts with our regional ACs. If they cannot resolve our issue, we contact TAC, and TAC is a ten-on-ten. They're well versed with their technology. They know the capabilities of their product and how it works. The one thing we expect when we contact an OEM technical person is clarity on the subject and the issue. There should not be a gray area. When we reach out to them with any issue and when the customer is also on the call and has already purchased the product or is about to purchase the product, the most important thing is for there not to be a gray area in figuring out whether the product will work or not. That's more important than providing a prompt solution. Cisco's tech support always clarifies whether a feature will work before proceeding with the solution. If it is possible, they always provide the solution. If it is impossible, they provide the proper documentation explaining why it is impossible.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. That's one of the main USPs, the deployment of these products. It takes hardly 20 minutes to deploy Umbrella over a network. And with email security, it's less than a one-hour job. After deploying, the fine-tuning part comes. That comes under the policies, so I don't count that under deployment. The next step will take another one or two hours, but not more than that.

When deploying the solution, we first go on a call with the customer, understand their pain points, and understand their existing network. We have to analyze the scope of work before deploying. Depending upon the existing setup the customer has, we make our steps. "Is there any prerequisite required? Are there any virtual appliances needed in the network to be deployed?" Accordingly, we will plan our activities. In a two or three-hour call for the first session, we have to define what we have to cover, and in the second session, we have to define the success criteria. The deployment is not a template. It changes from customer to customer.

Cisco's price point is good. When we talk about Cisco to our customers, they already have the mindset that Cisco has a particular price point. It beats other competitors when it comes to the quality of the product.

I rate Cisco Secure Mail a nine out of ten. Cisco is improving. We had a session where we asked them to improve their GUI. They have improved it and the end-user experience because it was too mechanical a dashboard earlier, where it was difficult to find mail logs. We recommend the solution.

We use Umbrella for our DNS layer security, blocking all the DNS layer threats. For endpoint security, we are using Cisco Amp. Whenever there is a requirement, we hunt for greenfield opportunities where no Cisco solution is present. We can then create a window where we can reach in. We deploy one product and then explain the single vendor advantages to customers. That mostly goes with the Cisco Umbrella, which goes hand in hand with Meraki. Once the user gets his ecosystem on Cisco, giving a single vendor solution is possible.

Similarly, XDR is there. XDR is one of the key products we're pitching these days. It's a simple single glass pane where we can orchestrate all the customer's products from a single dashboard. That's a major concern we hear these days from security personnel and IT teams. They have several products from several OEMs, and whenever it comes to orchestration or finding a glitch, they have to access all the products independently on different tabs or screens.

As far as policies and security with the components are concerned, Cisco is the perfect product.

We are an internet service provider with a few hundred customers. All our customers need a reliable solution for email security and this solution from Cisco helps us to implement the customers' needs and to offer the security the customers want.

We are using all the appliances on premises. They are virtual appliances only. We are not using the cloud because we own our data center.

With Talos threat intelligence we are protected. I cannot guarantee, 100 percent, that the protection will always be there because something new can appear on the market, something that Talos doesn't know, but we are confident that Talos assures us of all the security we need. We are happy to be using it.

We have customers who was looking at our product catalog, what we offer, and they said, "I don't need the email security appliance because at my company things are secure without that." The prices are quite expensive for the security appliance and the customer wanted to manage his business without it. After some weeks, we get a feedback from the same customer that the malware is already in his company and now all the data are compromised." After that, the customer chose to buy this email security appliance because his security was as important as anything else. We have more examples like that, that have happened in the last year. You are never secure without some solution from Cisco.

When it comes to preventing downtime, the Cisco Security Email appliance protects our customers so that they don't lose their information and can continue working. I am sure that many of our customers have been attacked with ransomware and with malware and this solution protects them.

• We are using Advanced Malware Protection since a few years and It works very well. 
• Our customers are safe now using the AMP sandboxing solution. 
• The appliance has more security such as SPF, DKIM, DMARC, and encryption. 

There are a lot of security features that we can implement.

All the appliances are connected with Cisco Talos and they check, in real time, with Cisco Talos. AMP is using Cisco Talos, and we have other products from Cisco, such as web security and AMP for Endpoints, that are using Cisco Talos too. Talos is a very important tool that speaks with all Cisco products.

We have been struggling in the last month with Cisco encryption and with the S/MIME encryption. I don't know if it is an issue on our side or if these features of the solution are not working very well. The documentation is good but I'm not sure if the functionality in these areas of the solution is implemented very well. We are evaluating the situation.

I've been using Cisco Secure Email for between eight and 10 years.

The stability of the solution has made a very good impression. In the last two or three versions, I haven't found bugs or anything that could affect the stability.

The scalability has been fine so far. We are very happy to use the cluster functionality in the ESA. 

The same type of clustering in the ESA has not been implemented for Cisco web security and we have been waiting for years for that functionality for the web security. But in the Secure Email it's working very well and we are happy with it.

Sometimes the customer support for Germany is good and sometimes it's very bad. We have over 200 technicians and we have been working with Cisco products for 15 to 20 years. We have a lot of knowledge. If someone in customer support knows less than us, it is difficult to get them to understand what we are looking for or what our needs are. Sometimes we need to escalate, to ask for another technician who can help us. There are times when it takes days or weeks until we receive good customer support from Cisco or from this company that supports Cisco. And when there is an issue for our customer, a few days or a few weeks could result in a disaster.

I have deployed some 100 email security appliances, so from my side the deployment is very intuitive and simple. We don't have difficulty deploying it in our data center.

We create our own template in our virtual environment, and from this template we are deploying further security measures. To deploy it virtually takes about 30 minutes and after that the customization for our customer could take from half an hour to a few hours, depending on how complex it is.

We have five to 10 people involved in deployment of the solution. The people who work with it are technicians, the system administrators, administrators, and people in IT SecOps.

We tested only two other solutions, the Trend Micro product and the Check Point product, so I can't compare Cisco with all the solutions out there, but it's all the solution we need. For phishing and malware it's doing a good job.

We didn't like the instability with Trend Micro. Check Point was complicated to use; it was a very complex system. The Cisco system is intuitive, simple to use and simple to understand. I am a technician in our company, so I don't know which solution is cheap or which is expensive. But for the functionality we stay with Cisco because Cisco is our partner and this email appliance can connect with other Cisco products. They work together and that gives us confidence in using Cisco Secure Email.

When it comes to preventing phishing and business-email compromise, in the last year the efficacy has been improved. For four or five years this solution didn't work as well, but last year and this year we have seen that with every new version, the efficacy is there, and the solution is working better and better. Our customers are happy to use it. It has made a great impression in this area.

Similarly, regarding spam, malware, and ransomware, in the last few years the solution was not so good but there was not so much malware. However, these days, the email solution from Cisco does a real good job of preventing malware.

About half of our customers use Office 365. A lot of customers, if they are migrating to Office 365 from an on-premises Exchange server, choose to increase their security with Cisco. The combination of Cisco Secure Email and Office 365 is working very well. Since this migration to Office 365 started, over the last two to three years, we have had no complaints from our customers.

We have trusted Cisco's email security for eight or nine years and we are going to use it in the future. We recommended it to our customers. We are happy with how it works, with the stability, features, and functions.

Our main deployment is for a shipping company. We're protecting their local Exchange Server and their online Exchange email.

It means less malicious email, fewer interruptions, and less risk. It actually circumvents malicious emails; rather than getting to the users, the users don't see them. End of story. There's a risk without it. The user might get the email and might click on the link. Once that happens, they are toast, as is the network.

The number of malicious emails it blocks differs from one company to another. It depends on the volume of email they get. I would say on average, depending on how many users there are, it could block 1,000 emails a day.

The most valuable features are protection against ransomware and spam. Those are the main two features. It also adds an additional layer to your networks. Cybersecurity isn't a comprehensive solution. You have to keep on adding layers without disrupting the flow of the business. The Cisco Secure Email Gateway does that, where it adds another layer without slowing down the business or the performance of the network.

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.

The solution has flexibility. I think they are working on improving it as we speak. They're responsive to the feedback we give.

One to three years.

It's very stable. We haven't had any issues or downtime.

It's very scalable, especially the cloud version. You can get up to about 100,000 users on the appliance but the cloud version is more flexible. When you do scale it up you don't see slower performance.

In the largest environment in which we've implemented it, there are 200-plus users. It's utilized by 100 percent of the users. It's not at 100 percent capacity.

Their technical support is very good. We haven't had any issues. Their response is very prompt and they are very knowledgeable.

The initial setup is straightforward. There are two flavors. There's the cloud-based and the appliance. With the cloud-based solution you just point your email server to the IP address in the cloud. With the appliance, you just install it into your rack and connect it to the Exchange Server. The cloud deployment takes about ten to 15 minutes, and the appliance, because you have to install it, takes about 60 minutes.

It requires just one person for deployment. It doesn't require anybody for maintenance. You just set it and go.

The return here is more security and fewer interruptions. It's more stability and productivity versus less productivity, although I'm not sure how you can quantify it.

It's a time-saver. If you get interrupted by ransomware or a hack, it could be costly. Every breach, just the cybersecurity breach, on average costs at least $65,000 to fix, let alone the interruption in work and retrieving data, according to industry sources. You could say that you're minimizing your costs by $65,000.

Licensing costs depend on how many users there are. It could range between $5 and $7 per month, per user. There are no costs other than the standard licensing fees.

There is no totally comprehensive solution in cybersecurity. I find Cisco Email Security to be comprehensive, but it's not 100 percent. There is no silver-bullet solution when it comes to cybersecurity. You better keep on adding protection layers to your network. Don't think you're not going to be a target. As a small or medium business, you will be targeted. It's so easy to get through a firewall nowadays. One layer of cybersecurity is not going to do it. You need to add two, three, four layers. 

It's just like going to the airport. The first thing you see is the check-in desk. They check who you are, that you have valid credentials, where you're going and why. Then you go through the scanners. Then you go through another layer of security. Once you get through, you're also being watched to make sure that you don't become "malicious." There are a lot of layers.

I would rate the solution at nine out of ten. What comes to mind when giving it that rating is ease of use. Just set it and go. A better UI would make it a ten.

I use Cisco Secure Email mainly as a email security gateway, including internal email distribution.

We rely heavily on antivirus protection, email content filtering, and authentication mechanisms to ensure compliance with email security. Regarding phishing attempts, while phishing protection features are crucial, we also emphasize user education as a critical defence. The intelligence services Cisco provides, such as the Cisco Intelligence Center, play a significant role in analyzing and validating threats, including phishing attempts, in our email security practices.

The discontinuation of physical hardware solutions is a significant area for improvement in the Cisco Email Security Appliance. This decision has posed challenges as virtual appliances are now the only option, which may not be suitable for all industries. The uncertainty regarding the future of the hardware aspect of the solution is a notable concern.

I have been using Cisco Secure Email for the past twenty years.

In terms of stability, there have been minimal issues, mainly typical hardware-related ones like hard disk failures. However, overall, it's a competent solution.

My experience with the scalability of Cisco Email Security Appliance has been positive, as it can handle our processes efficiently. We do have plans to increase usage based on business needs.

The technical support is satisfactory.

Positive

The setup process for Cisco Email Security Appliance is straightforward in my experience. Integration with our existing ecosystem of Cisco tools was seamless for networking features.Maintenance primarily involves tuning and understanding SMTP and email infrastructure and general email operations.We deployed it on our private cloud, and the physical enablement on the network was relatively fast, usually within a day.

Regarding return on investment, I find it highly valuable and worth its cost in the email security market. I recommend this solution to others, as it stands out as one of the best options .

The pricing for Cisco Email Security Appliance involves recurring costs for licenses based on the contracted time frame, such as one year, three years, or five years. Renewals are required after the license expires.

Cisco Secure Email may incorporate AI capabilities, but I'm not directly familiar with its implementation in threat detection. I would rate it as a nine out of ten due to its effectiveness, reliability, and value for investment.

We use Cisco Secure Email for email security, aiming to safeguard email communications. It plays a crucial role in protecting the integrity of email integrations, particularly as many companies now opt for Microsoft email services. It's designed to secure email activities and interactions within such systems.

Cisco Secure Email is part of Cisco's extensive efforts and investments in technology, especially in the realm of cyber security. The product is one among many security solutions offered by Cisco. 

While Cisco offers excellent solutions and innovations, the pricing may not be suitable for everyone. The cost of the software is relatively high. In the current market, there are numerous competitive alternatives that focus on security, enterprise networks, and various other aspects. Cisco, being a comprehensive provider, extends its expertise across data, servers, storage, and security, making them a preferred choice for many enterprises. However, when it comes specifically to security solutions, there are other vendors that specialize solely in this domain, offering competitive options.

I've personally been working with Cisco Secure Email for the past three to four years. However, in a professional capacity, I've been dedicated to the field of security for about one year and eighteen months.

I will rate it 8 out of 10.

They were helpful.

Positive

Migrating to cloud systems could be challenging. 

We handle end-to-end implementation and also provide support services.

It is expensive. I would rate it 2 out of 10, where 1 is the most expensive and 10 is the cheapest. 

I consider Cisco Secure Email to be a top-notch product and would rate it as a ten out of ten.

We use Cisco Secure Email for email security.

The product stands out compared to other vendors in simplicity and ease of use. It is competitive and should be considered a user-friendly option. Its integration capability is good as well.

It would be beneficial to have additional DLP functionality, particularly in the email DLP aspect. It could be included in the next release of the product.

I've been using Cisco Secure Email for ten years. Currently, I'm using the latest version.

The stability of the product is a ten on ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I've had a good experience with Cisco's customer service and support team. They respond immediately.

Positive

We have worked with Barracuda Email Security and Trend Micro Email Security.

We have deployed Cisco Secure Email both on-premises and in the cloud. One can use it as a private cloud solution or a virtual appliance in a cloud environment. The implementation and configuration process, including the dashboard, was user-friendly and straightforward. Along with it, the on-premises deployment was easy. It took less than an hour to complete.

It is a reasonably priced solution. I rate its pricing as a seven out of ten.

Cisco Secure Email is easy-to-use. I highly recommend it and rate it an eight out of ten.

The product is used for email security. We have around forty boxes of Cisco and cater to around four million users.

The strong point of the solution is that we hardly get any spam emails because of Cisco Secure Email. It has been a long time since I saw a spam email in my inbox.

Scalability has certain shortcomings and needs to be improved because there are service providers who provide better scalability.

Our company constantly checks out what the solution needs to improve. We need to be updated with what is available in the market and which application performs better.

The solution's UI needs little tweaking because most customers find it to be a very detailed and technically designed UI. If a person does not know email security or how Cisco devices work, he cannot manage it.

Other solutions are user-friendly. Even if the admin has a basic knowledge of managing the services, he can use them.

Cisco Secure Email needs to work on the security part, but it also needs to work on UI since it makes part of the entire solution.

I have been using Cisco Secure Email since 2010. My company is an email security service provider. I am using the solution's latest version.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.

We have four million users using the solution. In India, we are a premium service provider of Cisco Secure Email catering to many institutions.

I rate the solution's scalability a six out of ten.

Cisco's technical support is good. I rate the technical support an eight and a half out of ten.

Positive

We have used Sophos and Mimecast before in our company.

The initial setup is very straightforward, but a new person needs to be trained to use this solution.

The solution has very good pricing.

I rate the pricing a ten out of ten on a scale where one means it is less cost-effective, and ten means it is the most cost-effective solution.

I recommend Cisco Secure Email to those planning to use it.

Around 40 administrators are required for maintenance.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.