{"id":1371,"date":"2005-01-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-01-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2005\/01\/25\/symantec-goes-after-email-security\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:39:15","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:39:15","slug":"symantec-goes-after-email-security","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2005\/01\/25\/symantec-goes-after-email-security\/","title":{"rendered":"Symantec Goes After Email Security"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Symantec made big news as it announced the creation of its first email security appliance.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Symantec Mail Security 8000 line confirms what security insiders have known for years &#8212; email is one of the most open gateways to any organization &#8212; something Symantec intends to fix.  The Mail Security 8000 appliance line is Symantec&#8217;s first appliance, however Symantec has worked closely with other companies such as IronPort &#8212; which licenses Symantec&#8217;s Brightmail AntiSpam engine and AntiVirus engine for its C-series appliances.<\/p>\n<p>The only product in the 8100 line initially will be the 8160 appliance, which will retail for $4,995.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The 8200 series will spot 95 percent of the spam at the gateway and deliver only one false positive per one million e-mails,&#8221; said Daniel Freeman, Symantec&#8217;s secure e-mail solutions product manager.<\/p>\n<p>The first model, the 8240, is designed for medium sized companies of less than a thousand employees.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.ebcvg.com\/articles.php?id=540<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1371","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-product"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1371","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1371"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1371\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3858,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1371\/revisions\/3858"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1371"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1371"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1371"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}