We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and McAfee Total Protection for 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."The technical support is really terrific."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"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 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."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"The interface showcases threat incidents very well."
"Enables customization of file types and for different scenarios."
"The most valuable feature right now is the user control."
"You can manage your compliance in line with legislation such as GDPR and POPIA."
"The product provides us with an excellent, dependable solution to recommend to clients for their security needs."
"What I like about McAfee Total Protection is that it's working. I also like that it doesn't require any specific knowledge to set up."
"The most valuable feature is strong data leak prevention for data protection."
"The whitelisting works well."
More McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Pros →
"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."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"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."
"When this solution is used it requires a lot of administration because the users can have difficulties using it and require assistance. The administrators are continuously modifying the policies for the users. Technical support will be used frequently."
"The product fails to offer automatic classification capabilities to its users."
"The user interface is messy and could be simplified."
"In my experience, it's not really user-friendly for me, in terms of how I navigate with the ePolicy Orchestrator. They need to upgrade their management console."
"The initial setup is very complex."
"There needs to be support for blocking the sending of files by email because even if you block or remove an external disk, the files are not protected."
"McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention needs to improve the resources it uses for CPU and RAM."
"Technical support doesn't really offer fast response times."
More McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Cons →
More McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Digital Guardian is ranked 10th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews while McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is ranked 9th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 29 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is rated 7.4. 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 McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention writes "Highly beneficial DLP functionality, full system protection, and useful file scanning". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is most compared with HP Wolf Security, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention, Cisco Secure Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Digital Guardian vs. McAfee Total Protection for 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.
