What do you think about traditional email Security (MX record) vs API-based email security?

2.3k views2 Upvotes3 Comments

Director of IT in Software, 201 - 500 employees
I have experience with both and like the API-based way better. There is no downtime, and the implementation takes literally 5 minutes, with no MX records changes, no wait for the DNS to update etc.
When an email security solution asks me to change the MX record, I instantly see them as a legacy system and wants to stay away if possible
Director of IT in Manufacturing, 1,001 - 5,000 employees
API is easier, however. I’ve found in real world deployments, the gateway approach tends to be more effective overall by helping to ensure malware/phishing never even reaches the end email system, most notably by the flagship brands like proofpoint. I’ve seen API solutions rely too much on detection after delivery which allow the payload to be accessed by the enduser and then executed prior to detection/quarantine.
VP of Engineering in Software, 51 - 200 employees
Traditional email security or MX records are great for protecting against large-scale threats like phishing and man-in-the-middle attacks. However, they are not effective against targeted, sophisticated attacks. API-based email security provides an additional layer of security and can detect anomalies in behavior that indicate malicious intent. This type of solution can be especially effective when used in conjunction with traditional email security.

Content you might like

Senior Vice President - Advanced Engineering & Data Analytics in Manufacturing, 10,001+ employees
We can help here for prompt engineering from Zensar. This is Rajat. You can reach me at rajat.sharma@zensar.com
Read More Comments
1.9k views4 Comments





71.7k views166 Upvotes58 Comments




Non-production DBs (Dev, Training, QA, etc.)31%


1.3k views1 Upvote