We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian 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."Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"It has been scalable."
"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"The most valuable features are identifying sensitive data and issuing alerts."
"One of the valuable features of Purview is the ability to create a legal hold on a user's account within the compliance portal. That's pretty useful when it comes to any litigation or if you want to redeem the content within a mailbox, OneDrive, or a generic public SharePoint site."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"Technical support could be better."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"Technical support is awful."
"The support is poor."
"The solution should provide better integration with other systems."
"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."
"I would like Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to be on the source code or SQL databases. It is difficult to do classification and labeling when you have a third-party source code or a third-party Oracle database. It is seamless when it comes to Microsoft documents but is not so with third-party source codes. Microsoft needs to work on it a little bit more."
"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 →
Digital Guardian is ranked 10th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". 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". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Faronics Deep Freeze, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Intune, Amazon Macie and Safetica ONE. See our Digital Guardian 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.