What are your thoughts on Cisco’s Secure Email Gateway?

If my organization was completely cloud-based, I'd say drop Cisco for sure.

At my last job, we used Checkpoint (formerly Avanan) and currently use Abnormal. I love Abnormal, but it's definitely on the pricier side. Deploying both those services with Office 365 is a breeze—takes less than 15 minutes. Honestly, I would just pass on Cisco’s offering in your case.

Definitely worth setting up a proof of concept, especially if you have nothing in place right now. Do you have any other services in your enterprise agreement?

We switched from Proofpoint to Checkpoint after testing Abnormal, Checkpoint, and Mimecast. Cisco was off the table since I had a bad experience with it elsewhere. Never had good experiences with Proofpoint’s support either. Checkpoint's got a nice interface and does a lot, but has a few quirks.

Go for Proofpoint or Mimecast. While Cisco is solid for networking hardware, their email solutions aren’t as reliable—there are always better options available.

I would suggest dropping Cisco and go with Proofpoint if you can. I've used it for 8 years and it's been fantastic! It’s a bit pricey, but it definitely works well. Email security shouldn't give you sleepless nights, and with Proofpoint, it won't.

Cisco's email gateway (IronPort) isn’t great. However, their new cloud email defense product works well. But if you're considering Abnormal, it’s super easy to use. Proofpoint and Mimecast offer lots of features, but they come with higher costs and complexity.