Cisco IronPort vs Mimecast

Overview

Cisco IronPort

Stacks6

Followers19

Votes0

Mimecast

Stacks6

Followers9

Votes0

Cisco IronPort vs Mimecast: What are the differences?

Cisco IronPort and Mimecast are two popular email security solutions used by organizations worldwide. Below are the key differences between Cisco IronPort and Mimecast:

Email Security Features: Cisco IronPort provides a robust set of email security features such as anti-spam, anti-malware, data loss prevention, and encryption. Mimecast, on the other hand, offers advanced threat protection, URL protection, attachment sandboxing, and secure messaging capabilities.
Deployment Options: Cisco IronPort is available as both on-premises hardware appliances and cloud-based solutions, providing flexibility in deployment options based on organizational needs. Mimecast, however, is primarily a cloud-based service, offering ease of scalability and management without the need for on-premises infrastructure.
Integration Capabilities: Cisco IronPort integrates well with other Cisco security products, providing a cohesive security ecosystem for organizations already using Cisco solutions. Mimecast, on the other hand, offers integrations with a wide range of third-party applications and services, enhancing its compatibility and interoperability with various systems.
User Interface and Experience: Cisco IronPort offers a more traditional and technical user interface, which might require some technical expertise to navigate and configure. Mimecast provides a more user-friendly and intuitive interface, making it easier for non-technical users to manage and monitor email security settings.
Customer Support and Service Level Agreements (SLAs): Cisco IronPort offers comprehensive customer support with service level agreements (SLAs) for response times and issue resolution. Mimecast provides dedicated support teams and personalized services to ensure high customer satisfaction and quick resolution of any email security issues.
Scalability and Pricing: Cisco IronPort is known for its scalability, making it suitable for both small businesses and large enterprises. Mimecast also offers scalable solutions but may be more cost-effective for organizations with a larger user base due to its pricing structure based on the number of users.

In Summary, Cisco IronPort and Mimecast differ in terms of email security features, deployment options, integration capabilities, user interface, customer support, and scalability, providing organizations with a choice based on their specific requirements and preferences.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Cisco IronPort	Mimecast
It combines signature-based malware detection with reputation filtering and inline file scanning.	It provides email cloud services for security, archiving, and continuity. Protect your email system without compromise.
Web Security Appliance; Signature-based malware detection; Inline file scanning	Email Security; Increase Cyber Resilience; Data protection; Web security
Statistics
Stacks 6	Stacks 6
Followers 19	Followers 9
Votes 0	Votes 0

What are some alternatives to Cisco IronPort, Mimecast?

Let's Encrypt

It is a free, automated, and open certificate authority brought to you by the non-profit Internet Security Research Group (ISRG).

Sqreen

Sqreen is a security platform that helps engineering team protect their web applications, API and micro-services in real-time. The solution installs with a simple application library and doesn't require engineering resources to operate. Security anomalies triggered are reported with technical context to help engineers fix the code. Ops team can assess the impact of attacks and monitor suspicious user accounts involved.

Instant 2FA

Add a powerful, simple and flexible 2FA verification view to your login flow, without making any DB changes and just 3 API calls.

ORY Hydra

It is a self-managed server that secures access to your applications and APIs with OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect. It is OpenID Connect Certified and optimized for latency, high throughput, and low resource consumption.

Virgil Security

Virgil consists of an open-source encryption library, which implements CMS and ECIES(including RSA schema), a Key Management API, and a cloud-based Key Management Service.

ExpeditedSSL

Stop pouring through MAN pages and outdated blog posts that don't take into account new requirements. With our add-on, you can go from install to confirmed installation in as little as twenty minutes: using nothing but your browser.

Clef

Clef is secure two-factor — built for consumers. Easy to use, integrate, and pay for.

Wazuh

It is a free, open source and enterprise-ready security monitoring solution for threat detection, integrity monitoring, incident response and compliance.

Detectify

Detectify is a web security service that simulates automated hacker attacks on your website, detecting critical security issues before real hackers do. We provide you with descriptive reports of the results so that you can continue to build safe products

SSLMate

SSLMate is the easiest way for developers and sysadmins to buy SSL certificates.

Related Comparisons

Cisco IronPort vs Mimecast: What are the differences?

Cisco IronPort and Mimecast are two popular email security solutions used by organizations worldwide. Below are the key differences between Cisco IronPort and Mimecast:

Email Security Features: Cisco IronPort provides a robust set of email security features such as anti-spam, anti-malware, data loss prevention, and encryption. Mimecast, on the other hand, offers advanced threat protection, URL protection, attachment sandboxing, and secure messaging capabilities.
Deployment Options: Cisco IronPort is available as both on-premises hardware appliances and cloud-based solutions, providing flexibility in deployment options based on organizational needs. Mimecast, however, is primarily a cloud-based service, offering ease of scalability and management without the need for on-premises infrastructure.
Integration Capabilities: Cisco IronPort integrates well with other Cisco security products, providing a cohesive security ecosystem for organizations already using Cisco solutions. Mimecast, on the other hand, offers integrations with a wide range of third-party applications and services, enhancing its compatibility and interoperability with various systems.
User Interface and Experience: Cisco IronPort offers a more traditional and technical user interface, which might require some technical expertise to navigate and configure. Mimecast provides a more user-friendly and intuitive interface, making it easier for non-technical users to manage and monitor email security settings.
Customer Support and Service Level Agreements (SLAs): Cisco IronPort offers comprehensive customer support with service level agreements (SLAs) for response times and issue resolution. Mimecast provides dedicated support teams and personalized services to ensure high customer satisfaction and quick resolution of any email security issues.
Scalability and Pricing: Cisco IronPort is known for its scalability, making it suitable for both small businesses and large enterprises. Mimecast also offers scalable solutions but may be more cost-effective for organizations with a larger user base due to its pricing structure based on the number of users.

Cisco IronPort vs Mimecast

Overview