We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the seamless integration across different clouds."
"Defender's integration with our identity solutions is critical in our current setup."
"I like the alert policies because they are quite robust. It has some built-in templates that we can easily pick up. One of them is the alert for mass downloads, when a particular user is running a massive download on your SharePoint site."
"One of the most valuable features is auditing. Some of the other protection services have issues with auditing. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has an excellent auditing technique that helps us avoid the risk of filtering or information loss. You can use different tools to guarantee these things. It allows you to conduct an in-depth exploration of applications, users, and files that are harmful or suspicious. You can also enhance your security setup by creating personalized rules or policies that help you better control traffic in the cloud."
"All of the features are valuable because all of the features are related."
"We have become more aware of what services our users are using, how often they are using them, and what data is being sent out of the organization and to which services. So, it is really a lot about visibility and helping us make decisions based on that. It drives some of our policy decisions for adding extra security controls."
"Defender helps us control which applications are being used and gain more security insight into remote and hybrid users based on user identity and log in location. You can also integrate Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender for Endpoint to extend its capabilities."
"I like the web GUI/the management interface. I also like the security of Microsoft. As compared to other manufacturers, it's less complex and easy to understand and work with."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"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."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"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."
"For Purview's natively integrated compliance across Azure, Dynamics 365, and Office 365, I would give it a 10 out of 10. It provides all the insights and information."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"The product is easy to configure."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."
"I believe it's only set to be integrated with Microsoft Defender for identity and identity protection. I would like to see it available for use with something like Office 365 Defender. I don't think it's integrated with that yet."
"Defender for Cloud apps is primarily useful for Azure apps. It has limited capabilities for applications based on other cloud platforms."
"It takes some time to scan and apply the policies when there is some sensitive information. After it applies the policies, it works, but there is a delay. This is something for which we are working with Microsoft."
"This service would be better if it had a separate license, only for this service, that could be used to track usage."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps' initial setup was quite technical but we were prepared. The time of the implementation depends on the job and how many users are being set up."
"Sometimes, we'll get false positive alarms. For example, when a SharePoint path has no file sharing, but there is an external user, it will trigger an alarm that the file has been shared with an external user... the alerting mechanism should be more precise when giving you an alert about what activity has been done with the file..."
"We would like to get more information from the endpoint. I don't get enough detailed information right now on why something failed. There is not enough visibility."
"There are challenges with detection and there are challenges with false-positive rates."
"There is no AIP for Linux systems. That's a setback. Another thing it's lacking is libraries to work with Python. It has libraries for C# and C++, for example, but not for Python and, these days, Python is very useful."
"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."
"The support is poor."
"The solution should provide better integration with other systems."
"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."
"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 need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is ranked 10th in Microsoft Security Suite with 30 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 12th in Microsoft Security Suite with 13 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps writes "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need". 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". Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Qualys VMDR, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Amazon Macie, Microsoft Intune and Zscaler DLP. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.
