Looking for a Cisco Secure Email alternative?
Cisco Secure Email VS Libraesva
Looking for a Cisco Secure Email alternative?
Cisco email security products are being sunset across multiple SKUs.
If you’re on Secure Email Premier, Hybrid Premier, Cisco Virtual Appliances (C000v/M000v/ESA Virtual), or add-ons like Phishing Defense / Intelligent MultiScan, this page helps you pick the right path—cloud-only vs hybrid/on-prem control—and shows how Libraesva compares.
Libraesva is trusted by 3,500+ organizations worldwide.
Libraesva is trusted by 3,500+ organizations worldwide.
Cisco Secure Email Premier (ESA-based) vs Libraesva Email Security
| Area | Cisco Secure Email Premier (ESA-based) | Libraesva Email Security |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Secure Email Gateway stack (ESA-based) for inbound/outbound email protection. | Email security platform available as cloud, hybrid, or on-prem deployment. |
| Deployment model | Gateway-oriented (appliance/virtual/hybrid patterns depending on setup). | Choose cloud-only, hybrid, or fully on-prem based on requirements. |
| Detection approach | Gateway policies + reputation/signature layers; optional add-ons can extend coverage. | Semantic AI-oriented detection designed to catch modern phishing/BEC beyond basic rules. |
| Spam & graymail | Anti-spam and graymail/bulk controls (capabilities vary by configuration). | Reduce unwanted mail noise while maintaining control over deliverability. |
| Malware protection | Anti-malware layers + optional sandboxing (depending on licensing/config). | Layered malware defense; validate zero-day handling in your environment. |
| URL protection | URL reputation/filtering and link controls (depending on configuration). | URL/link controls designed to reduce click-through risk and credential theft. |
| DLP & outbound controls | Policy-based DLP and outbound enforcement (varies by setup). | Policy controls aligned with compliance and data-handling needs (validate scope). |
| Encryption | TLS and email encryption options (depending on configuration). | Encryption available (optional add-on depending on stack). |
| Integrations | Commonly used with Microsoft 365 / hybrid routing; integration patterns vary. | API integrations with Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. |
| Admin workload | Ongoing tuning and investigations in gateway admin workflows. | Designed to reduce operational overhead while keeping visibility and control. |
| Best fit | Organizations invested in gateway-based mail flow and mature policy control. | Teams that want modern detection with flexible deployment (cloud or hybrid/on-prem). |
| Watch-outs | If your package lifecycle/roadmap is changing, confirm future support and plan transitions early. | Validate migration approach based on your current routing, policies, and reporting needs. |
Cisco Secure Email Hybrid Premier vs Libraesva Email Security
| Area | Cisco Secure Email Hybrid Premier | Libraesva Email Security |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Hybrid package combining cloud and on-prem elements for email protection. | Cloud + hybrid + on-prem options under one platform approach. |
| Primary reason teams choose it | Hybrid control: keep certain handling local while leveraging cloud services. | Hybrid control without being forced into cloud-only when local processing is required. |
| Architecture impact | Mail flow can be tightly coupled to hybrid routing and legacy gateway patterns. | Supports hybrid routing designs while simplifying long-term architecture choices. |
| Data handling & control | Often selected where data sovereignty/privacy requires local components. | Option to keep sensitive processing on-prem (when self-hosted) or run cloud-only. |
| Integrations | Typically used with Microsoft 365 / hybrid environments (pattern varies). | Strong API integrations with Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. |
| Operational workload | Hybrid setups can increase routing, troubleshooting, and change-management complexity. | Hybrid support with focus on keeping admin overhead manageable. |
| Best fit | Organizations that need hybrid controls and have mature gateway operations. | Organizations that must keep hybrid/on-prem control but want modern detection outcomes. |
| Watch-outs | If hybrid offerings are being phased out in your stack, you may need a routing redesign. | Pick the target model first (cloud-only vs hybrid/on-prem), then plan a staged pilot. |
Cisco Secure Email Virtual Appliances (C000v / M000v / ESA Virtual) vs Libraesva Email Security
| Area | Cisco Secure Email Virtual Appliances (C000v / M000v / ESA Virtual) | Libraesva Email Security |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Virtual appliance form factors used to run Cisco email security gateway workloads. | Can be deployed on-prem/virtualized, hybrid, or cloud depending on your requirements. |
| Where it runs | Your virtualization environment (appliance-style operations). | Your environment (on-prem/virtual), or cloud, based on the chosen model. |
| Why it matters | Often chosen for control, locality, and integration with existing mail routing. | Preserves control when needed, while offering a path to cloud if/when you choose. |
| Security maintenance | Requires ongoing patching/updates and lifecycle planning (appliance-like responsibility). | Choose between self-managed on-prem or cloud-managed operations. |
| Admin workload | Appliance operations can mean higher effort for upgrades, tuning, and troubleshooting. | Designed to reduce day-to-day overhead while keeping strong visibility. |
| Migration approach | Transitions often require mail-flow changes (MX/routing/connectors), policy mapping, and reporting parity. | Staged pilot + phased cutover; align policies, reporting, and quarantine workflows before full switch. |
| Best fit | Teams committed to virtual appliance operations and gateway-centric mail flow. | Teams that want either a supported on-prem/hybrid model or a clean move to cloud later. |
| Watch-outs | If appliance lifecycle is nearing end-of-life, waiting can increase risk and urgency. | Plan early to avoid “rushed migration” and to preserve compliance/audit readiness. |
Cisco Phishing Defense vs Libraesva Email Security
| Area | Cisco Phishing Defense | Libraesva Email Security |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | An additional layer focused on phishing-related protection (capabilities vary by licensing/setup). | Phishing/BEC protection is a core evaluation area across cloud, hybrid, and on-prem deployments. |
| Best for | Teams adding phishing-focused defenses on top of gateway security. | Teams that want modern phishing/BEC resilience as part of the main protection stack. |
| What to validate | Impersonation/BEC handling, false positives, user impact, and remediation workflow. | Semantic AI performance on real-world phishing/BEC + operational workflow efficiency. |
| Operational workflow | May introduce an extra console/process alongside the gateway stack. | Aim for simpler investigations and reporting across the security lifecycle. |
| Watch-outs | If the add-on is being sunset in your bundle, you’ll want to re-benchmark phishing/BEC coverage. | Replace “add-on dependence” with a consistent detection model validated via pilot. |
| Migration note | Document current phishing workflows (quarantine, user reports, remediation steps) before switching. | Run a controlled pilot and compare: catch rate, false positives, and response time. |
Cisco Intelligent MultiScan (IMS) vs Libraesva Email Security
| Area | Cisco Intelligent MultiScan (IMS) | Libraesva Email Security |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | A multi-engine scanning add-on intended to increase catch rates (availability depends on entitlement). | A modern detection approach centered on semantic analysis (validate outcomes in your environment). |
| What it adds | Extra scanning layers that can improve detection coverage for certain threat types. | Focus on detecting threats that evade signatures/rules (phishing, BEC, novel payloads). |
| What to validate | Detection lift vs cost/complexity; effect on false positives; processing latency. | Detection consistency + false positives + admin workload during a real pilot. |
| Operational impact | Additional moving parts (engines, licensing, tuning) can add overhead. | Aim for fewer layers to babysit, with clear reporting and controllable policies. |
| Watch-outs | If IMS is being sunset, your effective detection depth may change—re-test with modern threat scenarios. | Benchmark outcomes rather than relying on “number of engines” as a proxy for protection. |
| Migration note | Identify which threats IMS helped with (spam, malware types, evasive campaigns) to avoid regressions. | Use benchmark + staged rollout to confirm coverage stays strong post-switch. |
FAQ
Is Cisco Secure Email being discontinued?
What if I’m on Cisco Secure Email Premier (ESA-based)?
What if I’m using Cisco Secure Email Hybrid Premier?
Are Cisco virtual appliances (C000v / M000v / ESA Virtual) end-of-life?
What happens if I rely on Intelligent MultiScan (IMS) or Phishing Defense?
What does Cisco Secure Email Premier include today?
Does Cisco integrate with Microsoft 365?
Do I have to move to the cloud if I’m leaving Cisco?
Can Libraesva run on-prem or in hybrid mode?
What’s the safest first step if I’m unsure what to do?
Libraesva Layered, AI-driven email security
Do you want all email security to run exclusively in the cloud, or do you need hybrid/on-prem handling of sensitive mail?
If you’re going cloud-only
If you’re comfortable moving everything to the cloud, you can modernize your stack without being forced into a single vendor roadmap—evaluate on detection depth, admin overhead, and data handling.
If you need hybrid/on-prem
If you need hybrid/on-prem processing for privacy, sovereignty, or operational control, Cisco’s sunset puts pressure on your architecture—plan your transition early.
Why Libraesva
Libraesva supports cloud, hybrid, and on-prem deployments, with Semantic AI that can run locally when self-hosted.