Share protected email and documents with anyone on any device.
You need to easily send customers, clients and colleagues documents, files and messages safely using email. With multiple delivery options, Echoworx customizable encryption can help you easily protect all the information you’re sending — to anyone, anywhere, on any device.
Gain access to eight different ways to deliver secure email – Web Portal, S/MIME, PGP, PDF, Attachment (PDF, Office and ZIP) and TLS with fallback.
See how Echoworx customizable encryption can help you protect the information you need to send.
Echoworx makes it easy for any size company to set the optimal path of delivery between sender and recipient. Delivery methods are pre-selected by the company and can be changed at any time. Best of all, Echoworx delivery methods can be combined to create unique profiles to meet your specific business requirements. If the first option fails, the encryption engine of Echoworx simply moves to the next delivery option to ultimately deliver the message and contents.
Only Echoworx customizable encryption provides eight optimal delivery methods for email and documents out of the box:
Message encryption anywhere on any mobile device
From jurisdictional requirements to remote access to just good customer service, there are countless reasons why a mobile experience needs to be consistent and reliable across all devices. Echoworx offers eight secure message delivery methods to ensure access to encrypted email on any device – offline or online. Echoworx also offers full integration with existing mail applications, like Microsoft Outlook.
Higher message limits for high-volume output
From sending millions of statements to customers across the world to sending sensitive time-sensitive emergency information, there are many instances where encrypted messages must be sent en masse within certain time periods. Unlike other email encryption providers, where message limits can be just a few thousand a day, Echoworx allows customers to set their own limits according to their service subscription. And, with an assortment of message visibility tools at their disposal, Echoworx customers can easily track, recall and revoke access to encrypted messages they send.
Policies to control which email will be delivered via TLS
TLS has one main drawback: not everybody supports it. Vanilla TLS can respond in one of two ways when not supported by the recipient: refuse to send the message or send the message anyway — insecure. Neither of these options are acceptable. Echoworx goes further by addressing TLS’s shortcomings and ensuring that your messages are always delivered securely. With Echoworx, branded HTML email footers can be added to TLS email, highlighting that the email was delivered securely.
If TLS is not supported by a recipient’s mail server, or if there is something wrong with the TLS certificate, the email will not go out in the clear. It will be encrypted and sent via another Echoworx secure delivery method.
Seamless migration of PGP systems to the cloud
Despite its legacy classification, on-premises PGP remains a common message encryption conduit for many organizations. But on account of its resource-intensive requirements, from hardware to physical servers to software to the staff required to run it all, on-premises PGP is hardly a preferred secure communications option. And, as more email encryption providers prepare to sunset PGP as a product offering, the time has never been better to upload existing on-premises infrastructure to the cloud.
Echoworx enables seamless migration of PGP systems to the cloud by consolidating all PGP activity, including key management, under one secure communications platform. And through migrating to the cloud, organizations may leverage other secure Echoworx message delivery methods. No more complicated infrastructure. No more confusing key management. No more dedicated IT resources.
“Echoworx’s different encryption methods were a huge part of our decision to invest in them. If we didn’t have that list of encryption methods and the user could not choose what they wanted, we probably would have needed to use multiple point solutions to have the same functionality.”