We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Symantec Endpoint Encryption based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Encryption solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The technical support is really terrific."
"It has been scalable."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"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."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"Antivirus, URL filtering, and firewall protection are the most effective features for data protection."
"It has reduced the number of incidents related to the loss of information."
"The most valuable features are the messaging features and shared folders."
"Its management is good, and it is also scalable and mostly stable."
"Disk encryption and file and folder encryption are the most valuable and used features. It is also very well integrated with Symantec Messaging Gateway and Symantec DLP, which is helpful in protecting any kind of information that goes outside. Symantec DLP catches an email and sends it to the encryption server. The encryption server encrypts the email and intimates to the user that confidential information is being sent out. The administrator can then take appropriate action."
"The solution is great for large-scale deployments."
"It is fairly stable."
"We have been very satisfied with the solution's security capabilities."
"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."
"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."
"If the client uses Windows 10 or 11 and Microsoft updates the operating system's version, Digital Guardian must update their product to match compatibility."
"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."
"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."
"I think that they should improve the on-premises version to include the manageability and simplicity that is available on the cloud."
"They have too high of a price tag. That's why they're losing the market share."
"What I didn't find helpful in the version we used is the fact that all devices had to be on the same network for us to push through the encryption."
"Upgrades from one version to another may only sometimes be straightforward, especially if one needs a clearer understanding of the process."
"The solution presently doesn't let network folder encryption be done on Macintosh."
"From an administration point of view, maybe it would be ideal to have it centrally managed."
"We would like some advanced security protection features."
"I can only patch monthly. I don't know what the solution is there, besides being vulnerable for three weeks out of four. But there's got to be an option somehow."
Digital Guardian is ranked 8th in Endpoint Encryption with 11 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Encryption is ranked 7th in Endpoint Encryption with 34 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Symantec Endpoint Encryption is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Endpoint Encryption writes "Provides a centralized management console and a straightforward initial setup process ". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Symantec Endpoint Encryption is most compared with Microsoft BitLocker, McAfee Complete Data Protection, Cisco Secure Endpoint, WinMagic SecureDoc and ESET Endpoint Encryption. See our Digital Guardian vs. Symantec Endpoint Encryption report.
See our list of best Endpoint Encryption vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Encryption 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.