ClrStream vs. Mimecast Advanced Email Security

Mimecast is good when you are needing a basic email security platform. It does some basic things really well, but when you start hitting some advanced needs, it lacks. Mimecast does not do a good job with BEC detection. Mimecast does spam filtering alright, but it could be much better. It really doesn't care about gmail or other external addresses. It doesn't check for age of accounts, etc.

Incentivized

• Email retention - convenience for the end-users to access older messages even if they've deleted them from Outlook
• SPAM management - allows us to prevent SPAM and Phishing attacks with custom policies that fit our organizational needs
• URL protection - allows incoming emails with a URL to be scanned and protects our end-users from clicking on malicious URLs

Incentivized

• The Admin Management console is absurdly complicated. For every first time we wanted to setup we've had to call their support for assistance. Support is quick and fantastic but it's so difficult to do anything yourself. They seem to have gone out of their way to call features unique things instead of using standard language from other providers so you as an IT professional know what you're looking for to setup.
• They have lots of KB articles, which their support will point you to. They are written on the most basic level and don't actually provide the help you need. For example, the KB page will tell you the list of options on the page... but not actually tell you what you do, why you might use them, or define their terminology.
• Their email threat management system has several nice features. One of the features available is that it will rewrite links in emails so that users click the link and it sandboxes the link, testing it on their server space and the user sees it there. This means the actual link in the email gets changed to the address of one of their servers. As a law firm, the EXACT LINKS are important to maintain in our communications and editing actual data from our clients to point to a Mimecast server is an unacceptable practice. I wish they had an alternative that did not edit the link itself on the page.

Incentivized

Yes using the same administration console is good, as user that you have assigned limited functionality to the console, they are already familiar with it when you increase their functionality. The new portal does take a bit of getting used to, but i can see that it is an improvement on the old version.

Incentivized

When calling them you get best in the world customer services but as previously mentioned their online community and capabilities are a bit lacking. They want you to log into their portal to see updates on issues (vs. using a public facing service) and I rarely find the answers to my issues in electronic format. Their online presence is only helpful with the simplest of issues.

Incentivized

Previously we have only used the default on-premise exchange that comes with SBS. This was very simple and only provided basic filtering of spam and junk mail. We weren't able to filter impersonation mail or emails with malicious code

Incentivized

• Reasonably priced solution, even for a small business like ours.
• It's hard to put a figure on our ROI - I would just say we feel like we've gotten our money's worth with the advanced email protection we receive. We have definitely avoided many potentially dangerous emails since we've implemented this solution.

Incentivized