Mimecast Email Security 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.

We have a client using the Mimecast tool. We observe multiple information sensors, such as default information, mismatched data, unknown IPs, and various user activities.

They use Mimecast to monitor outbound traffic, including impersonation and mismatched data. All these activities are managed within Mimecast. Companies use Mimecast to enhance network security within their budget. For outbound communication, emails go to Mimecast, where they are scanned and delivered to the user.

We are monitoring emails that come from outside the organization. Some impersonation policies are in place, and we are tracking five different types of impersonation policies. These policies include external IP addresses, external users, reply-to mismatches, default inbound attachments, and VIP impersonation cases.

Mimecast need to ensure that the body text format is correctly handled and that images are properly embedded in the body text. Additionally, Mimecast should ensure that the system can accommodate multiple users and effectively send information to them.

We are using V7.5.0 of the solution.

One person is using this solution.

The initial setup is easy.

I have learned various aspects related to the topic. I will monitor all types of logs, including those from Mimecast, which provides information about users’ contacts, histories, and account numbers. Although multiple policies are in place, we are currently monitoring just five specific types.

Mimecast is useful. According to the premises, Mimecast is important, but the choice of tools often depends on each company’s requirements and budget. While Mimecast is a highly effective console for email protection, companies select tools based on their own budgets and needs.

It is easy for a beginner to learn. If a person understands impersonation policies and how to apply them, the process becomes straightforward. However, if someone is unfamiliar with these policies and their monitoring, it can be challenging. However, once a person is knowledgeable about impersonation policies, the process becomes much easier.

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

We use the solution for email security.

Email security is the most valuable feature of the solution.

The solution should include more AI features instead of Mimecast's more general static configuration tooling.

I have been using Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection for two years.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

The solution was deployed by a vendor for us.

Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is a well-known solution that was recommended to us by a third party.

I wouldn't say Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection is the best tool out there, but it's okay. I would advise potential users to try out its alternatives as well.

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

I am an investment research analyst. We use this solution for spam and as our security filter.

It's good, it keeps the spam out. 

It does a really good job at not allowing threats through.

This solution can be frustrating. It blocks many things that should be going through. I have to authorize permission, which seems to be a frequent occurrence. It may be that we have set our protection too high but we work in a regulated industry.

When you click to change permissions on something, it always launches a browser instance to tell me that I have taken an action. I have to close that out and go on to the next one, and when I asign permission another item, again it opens up a browser again to notify me that I have taken action. I don't know why it does that or why it is necessary.

The filtering needs more flexibility.

I have been using Mimecast for four or five years.

I have not had any issues with the stability of Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection. We have not experienced any glitches or bugs.

I have not contacted technical support.

I am not familiar with the pricing.

I have researched Magic Software. I wanted a better understanding of the differences in the offerings. I allocated capital, I am trying to see if Magic is a good holding for our small-cap portfolio. 

It is abstract but I don't do any application development.

I would rate Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection an eight out of ten.

It is our spam filter, phishing filter, and executive impersonation filter. We have its latest version.

It does a good job for us, and its admin console is easy to use.

Their support should be improved. They are notorious for sending you to knowledge-based articles rather than actually talking to you, but that is, unfortunately, kind of becoming a trend with everything.

In terms of features, I haven't had any complaints. However, I don't like the fact they moved to a paid training subscription model. They used to have a lot of free webinars for training, but they have started to charge for them in the past year.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is stable. We didn't have any issues.

It is scalable. It is used across our entire enterprise. We probably have about 175 people, and they range from our CEO to all the way down to our warehouse people.

They always send you a link to an article rather than call you and talk to you about the problem you're reporting.

It was pretty complex. 

We had a third party do the setup for us.

We looked at Microsoft, Proofpoint, and Mimecast.

I would advise others to take a good look at it. There are a lot of layers to it, and there are parts of Mimecast that we don't even use yet. It is pretty much a beast when it comes to email security, but just make sure you take your time and have somebody who knows how to set it up. Give enough training to your admin. I manage several different pieces, and Mimecast is one of them. It is just an ongoing thing that requires monitoring all day and looking for phishing, impersonations, and things like that. You also have to set up different policies as they come about for block centers and permitted centers. It is almost a full-time job.

I would rate Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection an eight out of ten. I don't really have any complaints, and it does its job. 

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. 

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.