We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Symantec Endpoint Encryption based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Encryption solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"It has been scalable."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"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."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"Overall Symantec Endpoint Encryption is a reasonable solution."
"The most valuable feature is that it works in the background so that the end-users are not aware of what is happening on the laptop."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"The most valuable features are the messaging features and shared folders."
"We use it for protecting accounts, which is its most valuable feature."
"It has reduced the number of incidents related to the loss of information."
"I like the management aspect of this solution. You don't want to have end-users tweak or set it themselves, so the fact that you could do it from a central point helped us a lot."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Technical support could be better."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"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 security could be improved."
"The agent can be improved on the solution. Right now, we have an Endpoint Protection agent as well as an encryption agent and another for the DLVs and other services. We would prefer a single agent for the entire product."
"I think that they should improve the on-premises version to include the manageability and simplicity that is available on the cloud."
"They have too high of a price tag. That's why they're losing the market share."
"The solution presently doesn't let network folder encryption be done on Macintosh."
"I can only patch monthly. I don't know what the solution is there, besides being vulnerable for three weeks out of four. But there's got to be an option somehow."
"What I didn't find helpful in the version we used is the fact that all devices had to be on the same network for us to push through the encryption."
"Upgrades from one version to another may only sometimes be straightforward, especially if one needs a clearer understanding of the process."
Digital Guardian is ranked 8th in Endpoint Encryption with 11 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Encryption is ranked 7th in Endpoint Encryption with 34 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Symantec Endpoint Encryption is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Endpoint Encryption writes "Provides a centralized management console and a straightforward initial setup process ". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Symantec Endpoint Encryption is most compared with Microsoft BitLocker, McAfee Complete Data Protection, Cisco Secure Endpoint, WinMagic SecureDoc and ESET Endpoint Encryption. See our Digital Guardian vs. Symantec Endpoint Encryption report.
See our list of best Endpoint Encryption vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Encryption 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.
