We performed a comparison between Code42 Incydr and Forcepoint 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 solution is very stable. Very rarely do we have any issues with it. We don't have to deal with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it to be reliable."
"Security tools: Being able to monitor data going in and coming off our endpoints. Seeing what it is and where it's going is awesome."
"Code42 Next-Gen DLP is scalable."
"It had the ability to preseed by sending in a data drive and could restore by sending the user a data drive."
"Works in the background and users are able to perform restores."
"It has quite a bit of flexibility in configuring backup sets."
"There are a couple of things. One of them is that they have what they call Incydr. Their detection and response solution to the insider threat area is called Incydr. That gives visibility to the clients that have widely dispersed employee bases due to work from home, or that had a dispersed workforce predating any of the work from home requirements. Even though they might not be inside the organization physically, they're inside the organization. It allows us to get some visibility into what people are doing, what the context is, and how to control what might be the potential for intellectual property theft or file exposure."
"t has a very user friendly status bar with common errors and has logs built in to the console so we can review the issues or status of CrashPlan."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint DLP. It's specific to copying to the USB or copying to the internal storage in our office."
"I like that you can quickly create policies and enforce them in a matter of minutes."
"The most valuable feature of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is the OCR."
"The fingerprinting technology is the solution's most valuable feature. It's unique to Forcepoint."
"The ease of configuration was probably one of its biggest selling points."
"The technical support for the solution is very good."
"One of the most valuable features is the set of built-in policies that Forcepoint has for PCI compliance. We just need to activate them and start working. Without them, it would be a big task to do a data transformation."
"The built-in rules, templates, and content classifiers are among the most valuable features. Some of the built-in patterns are good places to get started with. Along with the phrases, they are helpful in putting together policies and fine-tuning our policies."
"In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue."
"What I think could be improved is how I get support."
"I would like to see more flexibility on privileges, perhaps create another kind of admin for regions. Also, I would like the ability to access logs without having to be on the actual device or a super-admin."
"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"The application, written in Java, required far more system resources on a Client than other solutions."
"I think one we can improve is the compression."
"Java, please get rid of Java."
"There doesn't seem to be any feature that is lacking."
"We faced some issues with the endpoint installation of the agent as it is not from a common ground."
"The solution's interface is still not user-friendly for some customers. So, its interface can be better."
"Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention can improve by having an uninstall option for the client or restart of a client agent can be controlled from the server. This feature is missing which is available with other solutions."
"I am really impressed by the interface and management console but the requirements are very high and the response time is too slow."
"You have to monitor the solution all the time."
"Everything takes a long time, as it does in every software company, especially since COVID. That is something I notice with every product I use."
"Everything can be improved and maybe there is a way to improve the user experience through the interface."
"If you are a macOS user, there are issues in the area of USB control."
More Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Code42 Incydr is ranked 15th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 78 reviews while Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is ranked 2nd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 52 reviews. Code42 Incydr is rated 9.0, while Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Code42 Incydr writes "Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention writes "DLP great for encryptions; tech support is quite helpful". Code42 Incydr is most compared with Threat Detection, Investigation & Response (TDIR) Platform, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Morphisec, Qualys Multi-Vector EDR and MetaDefender Kiosk, whereas Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Varonis Platform. See our Code42 Incydr vs. Forcepoint 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.