We performed a comparison between Code42 Incydr and Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Backup and recovery have been great, but I love having the ability to keep the hybrid type build which they offer."
"Works in the background and users are able to perform restores."
"Low system overhead, setting retention policies, ease of use"
"It had the ability to preseed by sending in a data drive and could restore by sending the user a data drive."
"Security tools: Being able to monitor data going in and coming off our endpoints. Seeing what it is and where it's going is awesome."
"There are a couple of things. One of them is that they have what they call Incydr. Their detection and response solution to the insider threat area is called Incydr. That gives visibility to the clients that have widely dispersed employee bases due to work from home, or that had a dispersed workforce predating any of the work from home requirements. Even though they might not be inside the organization physically, they're inside the organization. It allows us to get some visibility into what people are doing, what the context is, and how to control what might be the potential for intellectual property theft or file exposure."
"It required very little ongoing maintenance once setup."
"The solution is very stable. Very rarely do we have any issues with it. We don't have to deal with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it to be reliable."
"The built-in rules, templates, and content classifiers are among the most valuable features. Some of the built-in patterns are good places to get started with. Along with the phrases, they are helpful in putting together policies and fine-tuning our policies."
"I like that you can quickly create policies and enforce them in a matter of minutes."
"After the configuration, it is very stable, and in the last two years, I haven't been faced with many issues or product-related challenges."
"Forcepoint offers many policies that conform to global DLP best practices, including requirements specific to regions like the Middle East, Europe, etc. They have a policy database in their product. That feature is unique to Forcepoint. Their AI and fingerprinting are incredibly effective and robust. We have tested it multiple times. It always catches the correct data being leaked."
"The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is the OCR."
"It's fast and it prepares loss reports."
"This solution has a great encryption feature."
"The initial setup process went well."
"The application, written in Java, required far more system resources on a Client than other solutions."
"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"You can't always filter out data that you'd like to."
"Due to recent changes that effectively abandoned an entire segment of their user base, I no longer trust nor can recommend Code42 products."
"There doesn't seem to be any feature that is lacking."
"In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue."
"I think one we can improve is the compression."
"What I think could be improved is how I get support."
"They need to improve their reporting feature as well as the incident response."
"I would like to see improvement in the reporting. We can only get one week's worth of data; we can't get more than that. Also, the reporting console is very slow, making it very frustrating to use."
"The product is good, but the biggest issue is needing direct support from Forcepoint."
"Everything takes a long time, as it does in every software company, especially since COVID. That is something I notice with every product I use."
"I'd like the data classification to be better."
"I am not able to get support directly from Forcepoint."
"The setup is complex and has room for improvement."
"The reporting features, the real-time reporting, can be improved in Forcepoint. On the dashboard, we don't have a feature that shows real-time incidents. We have to schedule a report in the environment."
More Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Code42 Incydr is ranked 15th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 78 reviews while Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is ranked 2nd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 52 reviews. Code42 Incydr is rated 9.0, while Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Code42 Incydr writes "Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention writes "DLP great for encryptions; tech support is quite helpful". Code42 Incydr is most compared with Threat Detection, Investigation & Response (TDIR) Platform, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Morphisec, Backup and Restore for SharePoint & Microsoft Office 365 and Cyberhaven, whereas Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Varonis Platform. See our Code42 Incydr vs. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention report.
See our list of best Data Loss Prevention (DLP) vendors.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.