Mimecast Email and Collaboration Threat Protection Reviews

We use Mimecast as our email gateway. We also use it as our archival service. All those phishing, anti-phishing, spear phishing, spamming, and other security filters that they have, we use all of them.

We have found email security very good.

The gateway is excellent. 

We have found the archival services to be very valuable.

It's really quite user-friendly. In terms of technical superiority and the product itself, there are no complaints. It is really cutting edge.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It was not so much about the product itself, however, their business model needs improvement. We have subscribed to an archival service, and yet, when we have to get our data out, we have to pay a fee to get our own data. They charge an extraction fee. This is something which really worries us as a company.

I've used the solution for about six years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very good.

The solution can scale well. If a company needs to expand, it can do so rather easily.

We have grown from about 2,600 users to about 4,000 users. We have added additional geography as well. The product is resilient enough to take care of all of this.

We have contracts and we are also subscribed to a service plan. Whenever we have used it, the service levels have been very good and we have no reason to complain.

We were previously thinking of an alternative to Mimecast for two reasons. The main reason is as an organization, we are in the financial service industry, and we have to show some data resiliency to our regulators. However, due to the fact that we're present in 30 countries, what happens is all Mimecast data is centrally hosted in one particular grid, which is preventing us from showing data resiliency to them. I want a solution that allows me to selectively map users to a particular geography. 

We didn't find the initial implementation complex. It was pretty easy and rather straightforward.  We didn't run into trouble.

We are a complex organization. We are present in 30 countries. It was a mix of on-prem and some were in Office 365. Due to the set up of our own architecture, we had to undergo some labor, however, otherwise, the entire process was pretty straightforward.

We typically use a subscription service. If there are version upgrades. We automatically get upgraded to the latest version, as it's a software as a service setup. We don't need to update it as Mimecast takes care of it.

If you need to extract data from their archival service, there is an additional fee involved.

As we are an enterprise customer and we have a relationship with them, what we are told by the reseller is that we pay about 40% of their list price for this product.

It's an expensive solution. There are other competitors, like Barracuda, who offer similar services. We believe that over the years, they have picked up, and their pricing is much more competitive than Mimecast. As an organization, Microsoft itself has really matured over the years. They offer probably 90% of what Mimecast is offering, and then you don't have to pay anything extra for it because it comes with part of the Office 365 licenses. That is why we also believe that there is a lot of room for Mimecast to get their act together, pricing-wise.

We evaluated a few other options such as Cisco IronPort as a security service. We evaluated Proofpoint. The comprehensive solution that Mimecast offers, however, really made us sign on the dotted line.

We're just an end-user.

We use their Perimeter Defense plan, we use their Continuity plan, we also use email to archive. These are the three scales that we use from them.

I would advise others considering the solution to technically evaluate their competencies, their highs, and lows, first. Also, read the fine print, and understand the exact costs. A company will need to understand natively how much of Mimecast capabilities does Microsoft offer if you just subscribe to an Office 365 license. It might make them rethink using this solution.

From a technical standpoint, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

The solution is used for banking and finance clients. 

The most valuable feature is the DMARC Analyzer. 

External security features need improvement.

I have been using Mimecast Email Security for one year. 

It is a very stable solution.

It is a scalable security solution. I have one client with 5,000 users and another with 200 users. Mostly, SMBs use this solution. It is a bit slow for enterprises.

The setup is really easy. You do not need to install it on-premises. You can install it on the cloud with any desktop. The deployment takes one hour.

The solution is expensive.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for filtering. 

The dashboard is very nice. 

It offers an easy initial setup. 

The solution has been stable. 

We can scale the product. 

Technical support is helpful.

The solution is very expensive. 

I've used the solution for a couple of years. Maybe four or five.

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

This is s scalable product. If you want to expand it, you can. 

We have 100 people on the solution at this point. The users vary. Different departments use it. 

We are satisfied with the technical support. We find them to be responsive. 

Positive

We did previously use a different solution. It might have been Check Point. Once we saw the demo, we felt this solution would be a better fit, so we switched. 

The solution is very simple to set up. It's not overly complex or difficult. The deployment only takes a couple of days. 

One person can handle any maintenance requirements as needed. 

We had a third-party assist us with the initial setup process. We did not handle it completely by ourselves. 

The solution is quite pricy. We find it to be costly. 

I'm a customer and end-user.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Our primary use case for the solution is for monitoring emails. It also flags and highlights suspicious and new emails. Overall, it protects from malicious emails within or outside of organizations. Mimecast Mailbox Community is an email gateway required for every organization, regardless of size.

The URL protection feature is valuable because it communicates all attachment-related activity and provides access to view the content of the message directly. Additionally, it can directly provide you with the content of emails if you have been granted access.

The differentiation between bulk spam mail and campaign-related mail could be improved. Campaign-related activities are challenging to find in Mimecast Mailbox Continuity. For example, in an organization with a hundred people working for you, there will be approximately 100 email IDs. As a sender, if I want to spoof some people in the organization and hack their credentials, I need to identify targets for the phishing campaign. So I could use an email address to spoof a Microsoft page or create a fake page impersonating Microsoft to harvest credentials. By sending a hundred people a hundred emails with the same subject and same sender, with the same URL, this will easily be detected. So the second option is to spoof the sender every time by sending a hundred people a hundred URLs with similar subjects. In the second scenario, Mimecast Mailbox Continuity is not very good at detecting it.

We have been using this solution for approximately five months.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable because it works on cloud and accepts over a thousand emails daily, so the storage must be higher than other solutions.

I rate the customer service and support team a ten out of ten. We have only had to contact them once, and they were quick to resolve our issue.

The initial setup is easy compared to other environment configurations because you will have to install the same information into an Exchange Server. However, once it is integrated, it's easy to configure.

The solution is expensive in comparison to similar solutions.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. My advice to users considering this tool is to explore everything. It has all the features required for distribution, such as the ability to mail. Explore every option available and check for tags.

Mimecast Mailbox Continuity helps companies continue to move. It allows them to continue to function and utilize email even if there's a downstream issue with your exchange server or online email server. If either of those goes down or offline for maintenance or any other purpose, users will still have access to their mailboxes and be able to send and receive emails. It gives companies business continuity.

I don't think it's ideally suited for maybe a smaller business environment, like, for example, for companies with less than 100 seats. They do have SMB packages, but I think from a complexity standpoint, it's better suited to medium to larger enterprises.

I would say it's scalable in large and medium-sized enterprises. 

Mimecast has some good support services in place.

A feature like Mimecast Mailbox Continuity is likely not something that people ask for but it is nice to have and well done. Continuity is normally sold as part of an email protection bundle, so I don't know if you can even get it separately.

My customer base is made up of small clients. They all fall between five and 10 users.

Mimecast certainly helped my customers reduce phishing emails.

Among my customers, there was a lot of traction for the archiving. The targeted threat protection was also quite useful.

From an administrative point of view, Mimecast is a little bit cumbersome and difficult. It's not something that the end-user can easily find navigate themselves.

I've been using Mimecast for five years. I used to be a reseller, but now I've moved on to a different business.

As far as I'm concerned, it worked exactly the same for a client that had one mailbox as it would for a client that had 500 mailboxes.

I've never set Mimecast up. The technical teams did that. From my understanding, it took them about two days to set it up. 

Mimecast is expensive. It's a premium product. It sometimes could be a difficult sell because of the cost.

I don't have anything to compare Mimecast with because I haven't looked at any of the others yet to see if there is something comparable. But I would presume that by now there will be other products that can compare to it. To get security and targeted threat protection, one could potentially look at Sophos Central Email Protection. But they don't have an archiving solution. So one would have to go somewhere else to get an archiving solution. With Mimecast. at least, it's all available from the same vendor, if that makes sense.

I would rate Mimecast nine out of 10. It's a brilliant product. It works very well. I've very seldomly, if ever, had any problems with it. It does exactly what it promises to do. At the same time, it is expensive. That's the only problem. And the price tag puts it out of the range of smaller businesses. That's where I think it falls flat. But I always tell people the same thing: If security is important to you, then certainly spend the money and get it, because Mimecast is a great product and it works. 

We use it internally, and we support other customers on it. Enterprises and large organizations use it to manage their platform on a large scale.

It is a cloud product, so it is always going to be the latest version. Mimecast themselves are the cloud provider.

Its administration console is very easy to use. The administration console is absolutely important because you interact with the platform through it.

Its pricing can be improved. It is a bit expensive.

I have been using this solution for five years.

It is stable.

It is suitable for small, medium, and large companies. It actually cuts across all the sectors and all the sizes. It is designed for enterprises.

In terms of the number of users, it affects all the users. We have over a hundred people at the moment. We also have more than 20,000 customers on it.

Their technical support is pretty good.

Its initial setup is pretty simple. It takes nearly a day.

In terms of maintenance, it is online. So, they do all of the maintenance.

I did it by myself.

It is a bit expensive.

If you want the ease of use, then Mimecast, or at least a cloud solution, is the way to go. It has been a good product. It is still at the top of its game in many aspects.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10.

The solution is primarily used to stop malicious emails with malicious attachments and can stop users from accessing sites or links that have a virus or malicious content. 

The security on offer is very good. It's great at preventing users from accessing malicious sites or email.

The filtering features are excellent. It allows you to any links an email might have. For example, when a user receives an email with a link, Mimecast takes that link and scans it, checking for any malicious content. If it's okay, then it passes on the email to the user. If it's not okay, or it's not sure about the content of the link, it then sends a notification to the user. It helps users to look at the user to see if it is a trusted source or not, and to decide if they want to open it or not.

The stability is very good.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The technical support is excellent.

There is always space for them to improve. As a user, the user interface of the management console could be upgraded, for example. They can definitely improve their management console interface.

The solution could always add more features and expand its offering.

I've been using the solution for about two and a half years or so.

It is a very stable solution. The last two half years that we have used the solution have been great. That said, four months ago they had some downtime for about three hours and it was something unexpected. It was not a good experience due to the fact that our main infrastructure had a problem for that entire time. It was not something that was quick or planned and it was during working hours for us. It was very difficult. We would have appreciated a heads up if it was meant to be planned.

Beyond that, we haven't really dealt with any bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze.

In just one group at our organization, we have about 200 users.

We don't have any plans to extend the usage. We are okay with the features and the modules already. We don't have any plans to change anything right now.

Technical support is good and to the point. They are helpful and responsive. We're quite happy with the level of service they provide to us.

Previously, we used Barracuda. We ran some tests and decided that Mimecast was a better option, which is why we ultimately decided to switch.

The initial setup was not complex or difficult. It was very, very easy. We had a problem initially as we were trying to figure things out and the Mimecast team was very, very supportive.

The deployment was fast. It took almost a week or something like that. It was very, very quick.

We did the implementation ourselves with our resources. We didn't get any help from a freelancer. There were no integrators or consultants involved.

I can't speak to the exact licensing costs. It's not an aspect of the solution I directly deal with. 

We are customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Mimecast.

I'd recommend the product to other users and companies. It's a good system and very effective.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.