SmishAlert
← Blog

Tessian Alternatives: Email Security Options Compared

Tessian Alternatives: Email Security Options Compared

Tessian is no longer a standalone vendor. Proofpoint announced its acquisition in October 2023, and the behavioral AI is being folded into the Proofpoint platform. Teams that bought Tessian for its human-layer approach now have to decide whether to follow it into Proofpoint, move to another API-based email tool, or rethink the layer altogether. This guide compares the realistic options by the problem each one solves. It also covers the one attack path that none of them were built to see: the text message.

SmishAlert
Extend Protection Beyond Email
SmishAlert helps security teams collect and analyze suspicious mobile messages, correlate reports, and identify coordinated social engineering campaigns.
Explore SmishAlert

TL;DR

  • Tessian’s inbound and outbound email protection now sits inside Proofpoint, so the real question is which architecture you want: stay with Proofpoint, move to an API-native email tool, or layer on top of Microsoft.
  • Abnormal AI, Check Point Harmony Email, IRONSCALES, and Microsoft Defender for Office 365 are the names most often shortlisted for behavioral email protection in 2026.
  • Every one of these tools stops at the mailbox. Once an attacker moves the conversation to SMS, iMessage, or WhatsApp, email security loses visibility.
  • SmishAlert is not a Tessian replacement. It covers the messaging channel that a Tessian replacement leaves open, and it is built to sit next to whichever email tool you choose.

Table of Contents

What Tessian did, and why people are looking elsewhere

Tessian was a human layer security platform. It addressed two directions of risk: inbound threats such as impersonation and credential phishing, and outbound mistakes such as misdirected emails and unauthorized data sharing. Its cloud-era pitch was behavioral: learn how each person normally communicates, then flag deviations after delivery rather than relying on signatures at the gateway.

Three things push buyers to look for alternatives now:

  1. Roadmap uncertainty. A product absorbed into a larger suite rarely keeps its own roadmap, packaging, or support model. Some buyers want the capability without the full suite.
  2. Architecture preference. Analysts describe a structural split in email security: legacy secure email gateways remain entrenched in large regulated enterprises, while newer buyers favor API-integrated, post-delivery behavioral platforms.
  3. Scope. Teams reviewing their stack for a replacement often discover that the unsolved problem is not a better email filter. It is everything that happens outside email.

The third point matters most for the rest of this article, so we return to it after the comparison.

The main Tessian alternatives

These are the products security teams most often put on a shortlist. We have no commercial relationship with any of them and have not tested them side by side. The comparison reflects how they position themselves and how independent roundups describe them. Verify current packaging and pricing with each vendor, since most sell on custom quotes.

Proofpoint (including the Tessian technology)

The default path for existing Tessian customers. Proofpoint is a long-established enterprise email security vendor, and the acquisition gives it the behavioral and outbound-protection capability Tessian was known for. The trade-off is breadth versus focus: you get a large suite covering threat protection, data loss prevention, archiving, and training, but you also take on suite-level complexity. If your organization already runs Proofpoint at the gateway, consolidation is the most obvious argument.

Abnormal AI

One independent ranking says Abnormal has pulled ahead as the AI-driven behavioral anomaly leader, with strength in business email compromise and account takeover detection. It deploys through API integration with Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace rather than a mail-flow change. It suits teams whose main concern is BEC and compromised vendor or employee accounts. Its focus is inbound detection, so teams that valued Tessian’s outbound misdirected-email controls should check how that need would be met.

Check Point Harmony Email (formerly Avanan)

Harmony Email is described by one vendor roundup as noted for inline API-based protection. It fits organizations that want API-based deployment with a broader security vendor behind it, and that may already own other Check Point products.

IRONSCALES

IRONSCALES positions itself around autonomous anti-phishing and user-reported email. It is often shortlisted by mid-market teams and by MSPs, since multi-tenant consoles and per-mailbox billing are part of its pitch. Its user-reporting model is relevant to the argument below: reporting works when users have a simple way to flag what looks wrong. We cover that more closely in our comparison of IRONSCALES alternatives for messaging security.

Microsoft Defender for Office 365

For Microsoft 365 shops this is the baseline. The same ranking notes that many high-risk organizations layer specialized API-based tools on top of it for advanced protection. It is the lowest-friction option when licensing is already in place, but it generally does not replicate Tessian’s outbound behavioral coaching.

Smaller and specialist names

Independent comparison sites also list vendors such as INKY, xorlab, Zivver, and Vade as Tessian competitors. Zivver in particular is relevant if your priority is secure outbound communication rather than inbound detection. Treat these as candidates to evaluate against your specific requirement, not as general replacements.

How to choose: a short decision table

If your main need is… Look first at Watch for
Staying with the Tessian capability set Proofpoint Suite complexity, packaging changes
BEC and account takeover on M365 or Google Abnormal AI Outbound controls may need a separate answer
API-based deployment from a broad vendor Check Point Harmony Email Fit with your existing vendor estate
MSP or mid-market multi-tenant management IRONSCALES Depth of outbound protection
Lowest-cost baseline on Microsoft 365 Defender for Office 365 Gaps against targeted, low-volume attacks
Messaging attacks on SMS, iMessage, WhatsApp A messaging-specific layer such as SmishAlert Not an email replacement

When you evaluate any AI-driven detector, ask how the vendor tests it against adversarial input, and how you would. A practical playbook on AI red teaming for technical leaders is a good starting framework for that conversation.

The gap every email alternative shares

Swapping Tessian for another email tool changes how well you detect threats in the inbox. It does not change what happens when an attacker leaves the inbox.

That is the pattern security teams increasingly see. A phishing email or a spoofed executive request starts the pretext, and the follow-up arrives by text. Secure email gateways cannot intercept mobile-native attacks because they have no visibility into the messaging ecosystem, so security teams go blind when the conversation shifts to SMS, WhatsApp, or iMessage.

The volume is not trivial. One 2026 analysis reports smishing at 69.3% of all mobile-targeted phishing, with incidents up 22% year over year as of July 2026. The same source says smishing click rates are frequently 4 to 7 times higher than email, and that platforms such as Darcula and Lucid have registered over 194,000 malicious domains since January 2024 to automate campaigns. Those are one vendor’s figures, so treat them as directional, but the direction is consistent with what other researchers describe.

Reported smishing rates, clicks, and domains

Generative AI is making the lures better. A June 2026 campaign analysis describes a phishing-as-a-service network that used Google’s Gemini to mass-produce fraudulent sites and SMS lures. Fluent, localized text is no longer a reliable tell.

And the usual fallback, SMS-based authentication, is weak. In December 2024 the FBI and CISA advised against SMS codes as a second factor, with CISA’s mobile guidance pointing toward phishing-resistant methods such as FIDO2/WebAuthn.

Why awareness training does not close it

Security awareness platforms train people to recognize suspicious messages, but they typically operate on email simulations and give the SOC no telemetry on what employees actually receive on their phones. Training without a reporting path and without analysis leaves defenders with no data. When ten employees receive the same payroll-diversion text, the question is whether anyone can see that it is one campaign.

What a messaging layer needs to do

Whether you build, buy, or extend something you already own, a credible answer to messaging-based social engineering should cover five things:

  1. Frictionless reporting. Users forward or report a suspicious text in seconds, on managed and BYOD devices alike.
  2. Automated analysis. The message, sender, and any linked destination are assessed without waiting for an analyst.
  3. Campaign correlation. Reports are clustered across users so that individual messages become a visible campaign, with shared infrastructure, pretext, and targets.
  4. Pipeline integration. Findings flow into the SIEM and SOAR tooling. Practitioners stress that remediation cannot be manual and that mobile-initiated compromise deserves email-level urgency, including monitoring for post-access signs such as lateral movement and credential abuse.
  5. Audit-ready records. Incident reports that satisfy compliance and legal review.

Smishing is one slice of this. Executive impersonation over iMessage, payroll fraud, vendor compromise, and gift card requests are messaging-based social engineering that does not always involve a malicious link at all. For that reason we use “smishing” for SMS phishing specifically, and the broader term for the full problem.

Where SmishAlert fits

SmishAlert is a security platform for organizations to detect, block, and measure social engineering delivered over SMS, iMessage, WhatsApp, and other mobile messaging channels. It is built to complement your email stack, not replace it, which is why it works alongside Proofpoint, Abnormal, Check Point, IRONSCALES, or Defender.

It addresses the five requirements above directly:

  • Reporting and protection for employees and high-risk users, including on-device iOS message filtering and Android and cross-channel reporting, for managed, BYOD, and executive devices.
  • Threat analysis of reported messages and senders for executive impersonation, credential phishing, payroll fraud, payment scams, gift card fraud, and brand impersonation.
  • Campaign correlation across a user population, so the security team sees coordinated, multi-channel campaigns as they emerge.
  • SIEM and API integration and audit-ready incident reporting.
  • App-free reporting for constituents. Banks, credit unions, universities, and school districts can let customers, members, and students report suspicious texts without installing anything.

If mobile device management is the obstacle, read how to deploy mobile phishing protection without MDM. For executive-targeted fraud, see how companies can protect employees from executive impersonation via text.

Our commercial model is an annual per-user subscription, typically following a paid 30-day pilot whose fee is credited toward the first annual subscription. Pricing is not published. Executive coverage is scoped through direct engagement.

Next step: See how SmishAlert gives your security team visibility into text-based attacks on the product page, or review live campaign examples from our threat intelligence work.

A practical way to run the evaluation

Teams replacing Tessian tend to get better outcomes by separating two decisions that vendors like to bundle.

Decision one: the email layer. Write down what you actually used Tessian for. If it was outbound misdirected-email prevention, shortlist tools that do it natively. If it was inbound behavioral detection, compare API-based products on your own mail data in a proof of concept. Run each candidate against real, anonymized examples of attacks you have seen, including low-volume targeted ones.

Decision two: the channel gap. Pull the last six months of incident tickets and look for any that mention a text, a call, or a messaging app. Ask help desk and finance staff how often employees mention suspicious texts. Most teams have no systematic count, which is itself the finding. A pilot of a messaging layer gives you the first dataset: volume, pretext types, and whether campaigns target specific roles.

A practical way to run the evaluation — overview diagram

For the controls that sit around both decisions, our guides on smishing protection best practices for enterprises and managed smishing protection go deeper. Teams moving authentication away from SMS codes should follow the phishing-resistant guidance cited above.

Who should choose what

  • Large regulated enterprise already on Proofpoint: staying put for email is defensible. Add a messaging layer so the SOC can see mobile-delivered attacks.
  • Microsoft 365 organization worried about BEC: pair Defender with an API-based behavioral tool, then add messaging visibility.
  • MSP or MSSP: weigh multi-tenant console and billing needs for the email tool. Our partner program covers messaging protection you can offer across clients.
  • Bank, credit union, college, or school district: your exposure includes customers, members, and students who receive scam texts impersonating you. An email tool will not help them. App-free reporting will.

FAQ

Is Tessian still available?

Tessian is now part of Proofpoint, and its technology is being integrated into the Proofpoint enterprise platform. Existing customers should confirm packaging, support terms, and renewal conditions directly with Proofpoint. Teams that want a different architecture can evaluate the alternatives above.

What is the closest alternative to Tessian?

There is no exact match, because Tessian combined inbound behavioral detection with outbound data-loss prevention. Proofpoint is the continuation of the product itself. Abnormal AI and Check Point Harmony Email are common API-based choices for inbound behavioral detection, while outbound protection may need a separate evaluation.

Does SmishAlert replace Tessian?

No. SmishAlert does not filter email. It covers social engineering over SMS, iMessage, WhatsApp, and other messaging channels, which email security tools cannot see. Most customers would run it alongside their chosen email platform.

Why do email security tools miss text-message attacks?

They inspect mail flow or mailboxes, and text messages never pass through either. When an attacker moves a conversation to a phone, the email tool has nothing to analyze. Closing that gap requires user reporting, mobile-side analysis, and correlation across reports.

Sources