We compared Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention offers robust data protection capabilities, seamless integration, and reliable incident response mechanisms. Users appreciate its prevention of data leakage and policy enforcement. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention focuses on safeguarding sensitive data, offering comprehensive visibility, and efficient breach detection. Users praise its affordability, ease of use, and seamless integration with Microsoft tools. Both products have strong customer service, but Forcepoint users desire a better interface and reporting, while Purview users seek more accurate breach prevention and customizable policy options.
Features: The valuable features of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention include robust data protection capabilities, comprehensive policy enforcement, and reliable incident response mechanisms. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention highlights safeguarding sensitive data, comprehensive visibility and control over data, and efficient detection of potential data breaches.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is described as minimal, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is praised for its affordability. Users find the licensing process for Forcepoint straightforward, while Microsoft Purview offers flexible and accommodating licensing options., Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention has received highly beneficial user reviews, emphasizing its efficient data protection capabilities, prevention of information loss and leakage, improved productivity, enhanced security, and cost savings. In comparison, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention received notably positive feedback, highlighting its effectiveness in preventing data loss, reliable data protection features, seamless integration with existing systems, and tangible benefits in terms of enhanced data security and protection.
Room for Improvement: Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention has been criticized for its user interface, reporting capabilities, documentation, technical support, and customization options. In comparison, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention requires enhancements in accuracy, policy options, user interface, and integration with other Microsoft applications.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews show that the implementation time for Forcepoint DLP ranges from one week to three months, while the implementation time for Microsoft Purview DLP varies from one week to three months. The reviews suggest that the time frames mentioned should be taken into consideration, as they might refer to separate phases or the same period., The customer service for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention received positive feedback for their helpful and knowledgeable support team. Microsoft Purview's customer service is highly regarded for its promptness, efficiency, and reliability of assistance.
The summary above is based on 41 interviews we conducted recently with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The Optical Character Recognition (OCR) functionality is another helpful feature, especially for unstructured data. Being able to discover sensitive data in an unstructured format is the most beneficial element of the solution."
"The integration is great."
"We receive a lot of insights from this product."
"Forcepoint DLP's most valuable feature is that it provides complete end-to-end security."
"I like that you can quickly create policies and enforce them in a matter of minutes."
"This solution has a great encryption feature."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint DLP. It's specific to copying to the USB or copying to the internal storage in our office."
"The solution is easy to manage."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features are identifying sensitive data and issuing alerts."
"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."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."
"The deployment and troubleshooting aspects of Forcepoint need improving."
"In terms of display, the support and the Mac platform requires a lot of improvement."
"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."
"One area that could be improved is the support. The current support is not very good. Because they don't come on time when a customer really needs it, they take a lot of time to troubleshoot anything."
"Their discovery or the way they discover the data at risk can also be improved. There are many database servers that are not supported by Forcepoint."
"An area for improvement for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is its price. It would be good if they could offer better pricing."
"There's zero Forcepoint presence in West Africa. Customers typically like having these things close to them. It would help if they had a presence here. Right now, Forcepoint West Africa has been administered from South Africa. Because of this, customers can't access premium support in our region."
"It would be better if we could easily integrate with other products. Suppose I want to integrate this DLP with some other CASB solutions or a firewall solution. In that case, it takes a considerable amount of time because Forcepoint DLP doesn't come with a legacy firewall or CASB solutions to integrate with it. We need to do it separately. It's not improvised for different sectors, and I need to look for other solutions. I'm investing a lot of time researching and implementing other solutions for other areas. That is one point where I can't feel satisfied with this Forcepoint DLP. The only problem we have faced is that it consumes most of the CPU whenever a Forcepoint DLP is deployed on an endpoint. This is when users feel some lag in their machine's performance or their Internet performance. That's when we uninstall and try to reinstall, or we'll give a cloud link to which it gets access. We use Forcepoint DLP for endpoint protection, not for email or cloud. For email and drive, we went with the Google DLP. Forcepoint DLP isn't as efficient on drive or chat, or email. For that, we have some specialized solutions, but it would be better to have a single console where you can control all these areas. It would be pretty easy for a consumer who is going to use this product. All in one shot, you can try to track it and enforce your policies on a single dashboard. That is one point currently lacking in Forcepoint, and I feel they need to work on it. In the next release, I would like to use this DLP across different solutions like network, firewall, email, or chat with a consolidated dashboard and with integration facilities with other solutions. Security should work as a whole. It shouldn't work individually in blocks. It does not serve our purpose. It should be integrated with multiple solutions. For that, it should have enough intelligence to work with other tools. I'm looking forward to seeing that kind of capability with Forcepoint."
"A site can have different containers where you store data. We have always wanted to apply compliance, labels, and policies at the container level, rather than to an outer shell or at the site level. That is something we have been looking forward to and I believe Microsoft is already planning something like that."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."
"They do not provide language options beyond the ones already available, so our language option is missing."
"The AI advancements can improve the false positives."
"The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options."
"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."
"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."
More Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is ranked 2nd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 52 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention writes "DLP great for encryptions; tech support is quite helpful". 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". Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Digital Guardian, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector, Zscaler DLP and Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Amazon Macie, Microsoft Intune, Zscaler DLP and Digital Guardian. See our Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention 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.
