We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and OpenText Data Protector 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."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."
"The most valuable feature is security."
"Scalability-wise, I rate this solution a nine out of ten."
"Has multiple modules and is good with integration."
"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."
"Technical support has been helpful."
"Some good features are basically its UAV Analytics engine. And even fingerprinting is really good in Forcepoint."
"One of the most valuable features is being able to see file movement, where files are going. Every week we review the files. It can identify software codes, so we code files and we know where they're going and who's doing what. It gives us visibility."
"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...The initial setup process for the solution is easy."
"I like that Micro Focus keeps a separate catalog of our data."
"The most valuable feature of Data Protector is its integration with VMware. A lot of software these days integrates with VMware, and you can run some of these things on virtual machines. You can even have your backup manager running on a virtual machine and use physical managers to move data around. Their VMware integration isn't too bad, but Commvault has that feature, and many other backup products do."
"I like that it supports HPE UNIX servers since many backup solutions do not - this is the main reason why we chose this solution."
"The dashboards in Micro Focus Data Protector are very good. They are similar to the dashboards in Veeam Backup & Replication."
"The stability of the product seems to be quite good."
"It's user-friendly and not overly complicated to configure."
"The deployment can be difficult."
"Usually for the biome of a small company, like 50 users, setup takes more than one week."
"I'd like the data classification to be better."
"The APIs for device integration are limited, so that could be improved."
"They need to improve their reporting feature as well as the incident response."
"The solution lacks sufficient customization."
"The ease of deployment wasn't as flexible as Digital Guardian."
"I would like to see the product extended into the cloud as a single solution."
"In SAP restoration, we faced issues with changing the SIDs and changing the path for every backup object. It is quite a lengthy process to do that."
"We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2."
"The Micro Focus Data Protector support is not as good as Veeam Backup & Replication's support."
"Many of our users complain about the GUI. You still need to rely on the command line interface. Because it originated as a Unix system, Data Protector is still a command line-driven solution, which makes it seem rather dated compared to systems that are built around a GUI from day one. It doesn't affect the functionality, but some people don't find it user-friendly."
"They should design the solution so that it is much easier for deployment and make the UI easy to use."
"The challenge is that we can't restore a single file from the VM in the data process when we do VM backups. But with Commvault, you can restore a single file even if you have a VM snapshot package. That's one drawback of this tool. When we do VM backups, it should help us browse the VMs to restore a single file instead of doing the complete VM restore."
"The downside of the flexibility on offer is if you over-configure it, it may fail to function as some configurations may not match."
"The new backup systems are using new mechanisms for the recovery phases; for example, VM, recovery and testing the backup before recovering it. These features are not available in Data Protector."
More Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is ranked 2nd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 52 reviews while OpenText Data Protector is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 100 reviews. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0, while OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6. 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 OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Google Cloud Data Loss Prevention, whereas OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, Symantec Data Loss Prevention and Zerto. See our Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention vs. OpenText Data Protector report.
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.