We performed a comparison between GitGuardian Platform and Microsoft Purview 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 breadth of the solution detection capabilities is pretty good. They have good categories and a lot of different types of secrets... it gives us a great range when it comes to types of secrets, and that's good for us."
"I like that GitGuardian automatically notifies the developer who committed the change. The security team doesn't need to act as the intermediary and tell the developer there is an alert. The alert goes directly to the developer."
"When they give you a description of what happened, it's really easy to follow and to retest. And the ability to retest is something that you don't have in other solutions. If a secret was detected, you can retest if it is still there. It will show you if it is in the history."
"Some of our teams have hundreds of repositories, so filtering by team saves a lot of time and effort."
"The entire GitGuardian solution is valuable. The product is doing its job and showing us many things. We get many false positives, but the ability to automatically display potential leaks when developers commit is valuable. The dashboards show you recent and historical commits, and we have a full scan that shows historical leaked secrets."
"It actually creates an incident ticket for us. We can now go end-to-end after a secret has been identified, to track down who owns the repository and who is responsible for cleaning it up."
"GitGuardian has pretty broad detection capabilities. It covers all of the types of secrets that we've been interested in... [Yet] The "detector" concept, which identifies particular categories or types of secrets, allows an organization to tweak and tailor the configuration for things that are specific to its environment. This is highly useful if you're particularly worried about a certain type of secret and it can help focus attention, as part of early remediation efforts."
"GitGuardian has also helped us develop a security-minded culture. We're serious about shift left and getting better about code security. I think a lot of people are getting more mindful about what a secret is."
"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."
"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."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"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."
"One improvement that I'd like to see is a cleaner for Splunk logs. It would be nice to have a middle man for anything we send or receive from Splunk forwarders. I'd love to see it get cleaned by GitGuardian or caught to make sure we don't have any secrets getting committed to Splunk logs."
"GitGuardian could have more detailed information on what software engineers can do. It only provides some highly generic feedback when a secret is detected. They should have outside documentation. We send this to our software engineers, who are still doing the commits. It's the wrong way to work, but they are accustomed to doing it this way. When they go into that ticket, they see a few instructions that might be confusing. If I see a leaked secret committed two years ago, it's not enough to undo that commit. I need to go in there, change all my code to utilize GitHub secrets, and go on AWS to validate my key."
"GitGuardian's hook and dashboard scanners are the two entities. They should work together as one. We've seen several discrepancies where the hook is not being flagged on the dashboard. I still think they need to do some fine-tuning around that. We don't want to waste time."
"For some repositories, there are a lot of incidents. For example, one repository says 255 occurrences, so I assume these are 255 alerts and nobody is doing anything about them. These could be false positives. However, I cannot assess it correctly, because I haven't been closing these false positives myself. From the dashboard, I can see that for some of the repositories, there have been a lot of closing of these occurrences, so I would assume there are a lot of false positives. A ballpark estimate would be 60% being false positives. One of the arguments from the developers against this tool is the number of false positives."
"There is room for improvement in GitGuardian on Azure DevOps. The implementation is a bit hard there. This is one of the things we requested help with. I would not say their support is not good, but they need them to improve in helping customers on that side."
"The purchasing process is convoluted compared to Snyk, the other tool we use. It's like night and day because you only need to punch in your credit card, and you're set. With GitGuardian, getting a quote took two or three weeks. We paid for it in December but have not settled that payment yet."
"Right now, we are waiting for improvement in the RBAC support for GitGuardian."
"It could be easier. They have a CLI tool that engineers can run on their laptops, but getting engineers to install the tool is a manual process. I would like to see them have it integrated into one of those developer tools, e.g., VS Code or JetBrains, so developers don't have to think about it."
"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."
"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 support is poor."
"The solution should provide better integration with other systems."
"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."
"The AI advancements can improve the false positives."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"Technical support is awful."
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
GitGuardian Platform is ranked 6th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 23 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews. GitGuardian Platform is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of GitGuardian Platform writes "It dramatically improved our ability to detect secrets, saved us time, and reduced our mean time to remediation". 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". GitGuardian Platform is most compared with SonarQube, Cycode, GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk and Veracode, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Intune, Amazon Macie and Zscaler DLP. See our GitGuardian Platform 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.
