We performed a comparison between GitGuardian Platform and Microsoft Purview 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."I like that GitGuardian automatically notifies the developer who committed the change. The security team doesn't need to act as the intermediary and tell the developer there is an alert. The alert goes directly to the developer."
"The most valuable feature is the alerts when secrets are leaked and we can look at particular repositories to see if there are any outstanding problems. In addition, the solution's detection capabilities seem very broad. We have no concerns there."
"I like GitGuardian's instant response. When you have an incident, it's reported immediately. The interface gives you a great overview of your current leaked secrets."
"GitGuardian has many features that fit our use cases. We have our internal policies on secret exposure, and our code is hosted on GitLab, so we need to prevent secrets from reaching GitLab because our customers worry that GitLab is exposed. One of the great features is the pre-receive hook. It prevents commits from being pushed to the repository by activating the hook on the remotes, which stops the developers from pushing to the remote. The secrets don't reach GitLab, and it isn't exposed."
"What is particularly helpful is that having GitGuardian show that the code failed a check enables us to automatically pass the resolution to the author. We don't have to rely on the reviewer to assign it back to him or her. Letting the authors solve their own problems before they get to the reviewer has significantly improved visibility and reduced the remediation time from multiple days to minutes or hours. Given how time-consuming code reviews can be, it saves some of our more scarce resources."
"It actually creates an incident ticket for us. We can now go end-to-end after a secret has been identified, to track down who owns the repository and who is responsible for cleaning it up."
"You can also assign tasks to specific teams or people to complete, such as assigning something to the "blue team" or saying that this person needs to do this, and that person needs to do that. That is a great feature because you can actually manage your team internally in GitGuardian."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to automate both downloading the repository and generating a Software Bill of Materials directly from it."
"For Purview's natively integrated compliance across Azure, Dynamics 365, and Office 365, I would give it a 10 out of 10. It provides all the insights and information."
"The auto-labeling feature is definitely the most valuable feature. It goes in and labels the documents for you in different repositories. It covers the Outlook and Exchange repositories along with SharePoint and OneDrive. It is really helpful in those areas."
"Because everything is on Microsoft and we use Azure, integration with the product is easier. That's the most important thing when you use many Microsoft products. It's easier to integrate everything in one place."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"The most valuable features are identifying sensitive data and issuing alerts."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."
"The product has improved compliance and confidence. We are aware of the data that is leaving our organization. It provides confidence in data management and information storage."
"It would be nice if they supported detecting PII or had some kind of data loss prevention feature."
"GitGuardian could have more detailed information on what software engineers can do. It only provides some highly generic feedback when a secret is detected. They should have outside documentation. We send this to our software engineers, who are still doing the commits. It's the wrong way to work, but they are accustomed to doing it this way. When they go into that ticket, they see a few instructions that might be confusing. If I see a leaked secret committed two years ago, it's not enough to undo that commit. I need to go in there, change all my code to utilize GitHub secrets, and go on AWS to validate my key."
"Right now, we are waiting for improvement in the RBAC support for GitGuardian."
"The main thing for me is the customization for some of the healthcare-specific identifiers that we want to validate. There should be some ability, which is coming in the near future, to have custom identifiers. Being in healthcare, we have pretty specific patterns that we need to match for PHI or PII. Having that would add a little bit extra to it."
"We have been somewhat confused by the dashboard at times."
"There are some features that are lacking in GitGuardian. The more we grow and the more engineers we have, the more it will become difficult to assign an incident because the assignment is not automatic. I know they are working on that and we are waiting for it."
"An area for improvement is the front end for incidents. The user experience in this area could be much better."
"For some repositories, there are a lot of incidents. For example, one repository says 255 occurrences, so I assume these are 255 alerts and nobody is doing anything about them. These could be false positives. However, I cannot assess it correctly, because I haven't been closing these false positives myself. From the dashboard, I can see that for some of the repositories, there have been a lot of closing of these occurrences, so I would assume there are a lot of false positives. A ballpark estimate would be 60% being false positives. One of the arguments from the developers against this tool is the number of false positives."
"The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement."
"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."
"There is no AIP for Linux systems. That's a setback. Another thing it's lacking is libraries to work with Python. It has libraries for C# and C++, for example, but not for Python and, these days, Python is very useful."
"There is a lot of ambiguity when you are setting up labels, such as sensitive information labels. It is a little daunting at first if you don't have prior knowledge, and there is a little bit of a learning curve for setting up the labels. Some of the setup wizards could be more helpful from an AI perspective. They can streamline the setup through more AI technologies so that you don't have to jump through so many hoops and different menus and dropdowns. It would be useful to have a setup wizard that is more hands-off and engaging for setting up the information type labels. If you tell them this is what we're trying to protect, it should basically start to lead you down that path of best practices. Such a feature would be great."
"They do not provide language options beyond the ones already available, so our language option is missing."
"Technical support is awful."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options."
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
GitGuardian Platform is ranked 6th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 24 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews. GitGuardian Platform is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of GitGuardian Platform writes "It dramatically improved our ability to detect secrets, saved us time, and reduced our mean time to remediation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention writes "Automation has given us consistent analytics and improved quality of insights into user activity". GitGuardian Platform is most compared with SonarQube, GitHub Advanced Security, Cycode, Snyk and Veracode, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Amazon Macie, Zscaler DLP and Microsoft Intune. See our GitGuardian Platform vs. Microsoft Purview 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.
