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."This solution has a great encryption feature."
"Stable and scalable solution for data protection. It offers good technical support, and has no major installation issues."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is security."
"Has multiple modules and is good with integration."
"The technical support for the solution is very good."
"Scalability-wise, I rate this solution a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is the OCR."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The initial setup was relatively easy."
"It's supports Unix, Linux, all of the OS's. It's very stable software."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"Integration with HP storage is a very strong point for Micro Focus Data Protector. It is the best solution for general operations like backup and restore. Zero downtime backup (ZDB) is one very important feature, which is basically the integration with the storage array. It is a very strong feature. We're using storage with snapshots with this integration."
"I have used Micro Focus Data Protector for the file backup facilities. My primary use of the software is to backup file data."
"The reliability of HP Data Protector is the most valuable feature for us."
"If you have an idea of what you are doing, it's very flexible and very stable."
"The support could improve Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention."
"The APIs for device integration are limited, so that could be improved."
"Everything can be improved and maybe there is a way to improve the user experience through the interface."
"We faced some issues with the endpoint installation of the agent as it is not from a common ground."
"I would like to see the product extended into the cloud as a single solution."
"The solution's interface is still not user-friendly for some customers. So, its interface can be better."
"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."
"My opinion is that the dashboard could be improved and made more user-friendly. They do not enable a wide range of proper inquiries and we need to identify much of what we need on our own, like incident severity."
"Other tools seem to be easier to use."
"I don't like this solution so much because it's very technical and compared to Commvault and Veeam, it's not so user-friendly. The interface needs improvement."
"I'm uncertain if it supports virtual machine backup and restoration. If they could enhance this aspect, they could gain more support from end users."
"VM backups needs to be improved. They need to make it similar to the way Veeam and Commvault are doing the virtual backups."
"We have so many specific technological cracks in Micro Focus, but we are not getting the features, facilities, or coordination between the global delivery centers and the R&D team that we need to express our ideas."
"In terms of what can be improved, I would say integrations with MongoDB. We use MongoDB and we need to go to scripts to do backups. We need more integrations."
"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."
"If you compare the solution with the same specific features and enhancements on another solution, Data Protector is expensive. This is especially true when compared to, for example, Veeam."
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 McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, whereas OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Veritas NetBackup, Commvault Cloud, HPE StoreOnce and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain). 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.