We compared Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention offers robust data protection capabilities, seamless integration, and reliable incident response mechanisms. Users appreciate its prevention of data leakage and policy enforcement. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention focuses on safeguarding sensitive data, offering comprehensive visibility, and efficient breach detection. Users praise its affordability, ease of use, and seamless integration with Microsoft tools. Both products have strong customer service, but Forcepoint users desire a better interface and reporting, while Purview users seek more accurate breach prevention and customizable policy options.
Features: The valuable features of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention include robust data protection capabilities, comprehensive policy enforcement, and reliable incident response mechanisms. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention highlights safeguarding sensitive data, comprehensive visibility and control over data, and efficient detection of potential data breaches.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is described as minimal, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is praised for its affordability. Users find the licensing process for Forcepoint straightforward, while Microsoft Purview offers flexible and accommodating licensing options., Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention has received highly beneficial user reviews, emphasizing its efficient data protection capabilities, prevention of information loss and leakage, improved productivity, enhanced security, and cost savings. In comparison, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention received notably positive feedback, highlighting its effectiveness in preventing data loss, reliable data protection features, seamless integration with existing systems, and tangible benefits in terms of enhanced data security and protection.
Room for Improvement: Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention has been criticized for its user interface, reporting capabilities, documentation, technical support, and customization options. In comparison, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention requires enhancements in accuracy, policy options, user interface, and integration with other Microsoft applications.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews show that the implementation time for Forcepoint DLP ranges from one week to three months, while the implementation time for Microsoft Purview DLP varies from one week to three months. The reviews suggest that the time frames mentioned should be taken into consideration, as they might refer to separate phases or the same period., The customer service for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention received positive feedback for their helpful and knowledgeable support team. Microsoft Purview's customer service is highly regarded for its promptness, efficiency, and reliability of assistance.
The summary above is based on 41 interviews we conducted recently with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"I like the SaaS solution they're offering now a little bit more. It's a new product but it's easy to install and configure."
"Technical support has been helpful."
"The solution is easy to manage."
"The scalability is fantastic. One of the things that I like about Forcepoint is that I can customize the solution to suit my objectives."
"The fingerprinting technology is the solution's most valuable feature. It's unique to Forcepoint."
"Our organization's intellectual property is not misused or extracted without permission."
"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."
"The initial setup process went well."
"One of the valuable features of Purview is the ability to create a legal hold on a user's account within the compliance portal. That's pretty useful when it comes to any litigation or if you want to redeem the content within a mailbox, OneDrive, or a generic public SharePoint site."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"The product is easy to configure."
"The most valuable features are identifying sensitive data and issuing alerts."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"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."
"The ease of deployment wasn't as flexible as Digital Guardian."
"The deployment and troubleshooting aspects of Forcepoint need improving."
"The support could improve Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention."
"There is room for improvement regarding OCR. I would like to see it enhanced to handle multiple languages and it should be easier to manage."
"The policy update size and agent size could be improved. We would also like to have a proper solution for Linux OS which Forcepoint does not offer."
"The user-friendliness of the interface in formulating DLP policies could be improved. An example would be managing policies. It's a little daunting at first, and can be confusing, at times, when it comes to how to set things up and how to add policies. They could improve on that."
"With respect to the discovery component, the reports are very hard to interpret because they come out in an illogical format."
"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."
"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."
"A site can have different containers where you store data. We have always wanted to apply compliance, labels, and policies at the container level, rather than to an outer shell or at the site level. That is something we have been looking forward to and I believe Microsoft is already planning something like that."
"The support is poor."
"The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options."
"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."
"The solution should provide better integration with other systems."
More Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is ranked 2nd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 50 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. 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 Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention writes "Automation has given us consistent analytics and improved quality of insights into user activity". Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Digital Guardian, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector, Zscaler Cloud DLP and GTB Technologies Inspector, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Intune, Amazon Macie, Zscaler Cloud DLP and Digital Guardian. See our Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention 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.