No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure Email vs GWAVA [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Email
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (6th), Cisco Security Portfolio (9th)
GWAVA [EOL]
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

KS
Technical Associate Network Security at Valuepoint Systems
Email security has protected financial data and provides clear tracking for every branch message
The areas of Cisco Secure Email that could be improved or enhanced are the slowness in the console. I don't think it was a database error or something, but we feel some slowness in configuring DLP and other content filters compared to other consoles. It may have been due to on-premises, but it was much noisy at some times while configuring DLP. When we tried to configure a DLP policy, the console became much slower. In that case, we cannot see what had happened in the mail which was blocked at that time. It may take nearly an hour to get back to normal while configuring policies. That is the major issue in the product.
GW
IT Menedżer at own
An excellent anti-spam solution for mail systems
The solution needs to be more user-friendly. I don't want to have to go to my IT guy and have him explain aspects of the solution to me. There should be a way for them to be able to translate aspects of the product to a typical user in a clear concise way. It might help if there was a better user interface.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"This solution provides some benefits, like comfortable access to TAC support. You get prompt support when working directly with Cisco."
"Capital expenditure is a significant consideration, and the impact on major expenditures prompts a careful analysis before onboarding the new product."
"Cisco Secure Email is a budget-friendly solution."
"Cisco's Secure Email integrates with Cisco Firewalls, utilizing the AMP as their anti-malware engine, which allows for information sharing between devices."
"It has the ability to tell us, after an email has been delivered, where else it went, once it got inside. Maybe it's something we wanted it to stop and it didn't stop it, but it notified us later that it was something that it should have stopped. It can give us a trajectory of all the other places that it went internally and it can tell us what files were transferred as well."
"Cisco Secure Email Cloud Gateway has allowed our users to be able to concentrate on the emails that they do receive. Previously, our users had to deal with nine million additional emails across the organization, which is nearly 1,000 emails per user to have to deal with a month. That's a massive amount for our staff to deal with and probably several hours of their time. We have a lot of clinical staff, being a hospital. We want to make our staff as productive as possible. By removing a lot of that spam and phishing type emails, this allows them to do their job."
"Overall, the ease of migration to Cisco's cloud email security from the on-prem solution was a positive experience."
"The tool's most valuable feature in preventing security breaches revolves around the area of malware protection that the product provides."
"It's a perfect business pump filter. We have much less false positives, and also less spam than other organizations."
"We have the visibility of what was locked and what was dropped from our mail system and what is safe for our users."
 

Cons

"Better dashboards and more interactive overviews would be nice, but the current functionality is sufficient."
"The user interface of the Email Security Gateway should be improved."
"It is not user-friendly, and it is quite complicated. So, it should be more user-friendly."
"More than a few steps are required to apply rules and these are not essentially intuitive."
"We cannot manage multiple devices from a single UI."
"The hardware is not up to the mark. Two to three times a year we have complete downtime."
"That's why I wouldn't give it anywhere near a perfect score, because the artificial intelligence just isn't there yet."
"They can do it better with web links, with the URLs."
"The solution needs to be more user-friendly. I don't want to have to go to my IT guy and have him explain aspects of the solution to me. There should be a way for them to be able to translate aspects of the product to a typical user in a clear concise way."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You're going to get what you pay for. If you're not willing to pay the price of Cisco, you're not going to get a product that's as good as Cisco. I don't think Cisco is overpriced, because for the last two years I've been comparing it to Microsoft and Cisco has been cheaper and given us more features."
"Cisco Secure Email and the support are priced well. It's not cheap, but there are other solutions that offer less and cost so much. For example, Microsoft is more expensive than Cisco."
"Compared to Cisco's on-prem service, the cost is the same, but you don't have to pay for the hardware and you don't have to maintain the system, as far as upgrades and hardware failures are concerned. It is cheaper to operate on their cloud service than it is to operate with their on-prem service."
"In addition to the standard licensing, there is a cost for SMARTnet as well."
"The license was not per user, the license model was per feature. You could choose anti-virus, anti-spam, etc. It was feature-based and charged yearly."
"As per market availability, this solution is more expensive than other vendors."
"Pricing depends on your environment and which model you want to buy."
"It is expensive. I would rate it 2 out of 10, where 1 is the most expensive and 10 is the cheapest."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Email Security solutions are best for your needs.
910,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise27
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Email?
The pricing structure is good as it is user-based or email client-based, which is positive for clients.
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Email?
The areas of Cisco Secure Email that could be improved or enhanced are the slowness in the console. I don't think it was a database error or something, but we feel some slowness in configuring DLP ...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Email?
We are using Cisco Secure Email to monitor the outgoing and incoming mail traffic in our financial institute. We have nearly 900 branches all over India. We have an on-premises mail server in which...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco Email Security, IronPort, Cisco Email Security, ESA, Email Security Appliances
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SUNY Old Westbury, CoxHealth, City of Fullerton, Indra
SVG Strassenverkehrs-Genossenschaft Wªrttemberg eG, ELO Digital Office GmbH, Grafisch Lyceum Utrecht, Deutscher Steuerberaterverband (DStV), Investment Savings Bank of Pennsylvania, Gwinnett Health System, Long Island Rail Road, Wisconsin Historical Society, South Texas Nuclear Facility, Northwestern Michigan College, Carilion Health System, North Memorial Medical Center
Find out what your peers are saying about Proofpoint, Microsoft, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Email Security. Updated: August 2026.
910,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.