We performed a comparison between IBM Security Guardium Data Protection and Informatica Persistent Data Masking based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Database Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The reporting side is also very, very good, especially its flexibility which allows you to tailor the reports to whatever information you want."
"Ease of deployment is a valuable feature."
"The purpose of EBM Guardium is to monitor database activity and who is accessing it. This is the most valuable feature."
"Our ability to see when users are accessing sensitive data."
"Satisfies audit requests, to give us an idea if anybody is accessing our privileged user IDs without our knowledge."
"The product has proven to be flexible"
"What I like about IBM Guardium Data Protection is that some of its features were deployed by collectors during the installation phase. The solution has collector and aggregator features, license installation, and even server patches that you won't find in other security providers. I like the collector-aggregator capabilities of IBM Guardium Data Protection where you install each component on separate servers, then on the aggregator, you collect all the logs on a central server or central console."
"Encryption is not straightforward, but Guardium made the setup easy for us."
"Informatica Persistent Data Masking can mask production data for different users, ensuring that only authorized individuals can access sensitive information."
"The most valuable feature is data discovery. This is the most exciting feature for all of the banks."
"The most valuable features are the structure masking and platform masking."
"Informatica provides a comprehensive solution for on-the-fly or real-time data masking."
"Informatica is user-friendly, stable, and scalable. These three aspects are the most valuable for us. If we can make it work well with the CRM, we can continue or try again this year to complete that part of the project. I am confident that this kind of solution is what we need because we have a third-party resource that works in the development."
"I would like to be able to upgrade appliances within major versions without needing to rebuild the appliance."
"We have had some issues with patches breaking things unexpectedly in our environments."
"I have already mentioned to IBM that a primary need is to improve the number of records in the reports above 65,535."
"The most important requirements for us are integration with new database solutions and the ability to manage things like Jailbreak or something like that. Its reduction feature can also be improved. It has a functionality called reduction, which is like masking data, but it is just a replacement of characters. Sometimes the customer needs more than this. It would be good if it was more advanced or complete. We also have a problem with this solution because the IBM aggregator isn't working very well. IBM has created big data intelligence for Guardium, and occasionally, customers need three or four months of data, but they can't run it from the collectors. It can have a better dashboard and more pre-defined use cases for those customers who don't have any idea about data protection or don't have expert personnel in this area. For example, they can include five use cases for banks and five use cases for retail."
"There are features like end-to-end and S-TAP mapping, and the ability to install policies for your configuration builder. They're not there, but we'd like to see them in the next version."
"Right now we're having some issues where it's using a high CPU, we don't know why. So, better testing before the product is ready would help."
"IBM should add more database security features to Guardium. They could add user profiling, anomaly detection, and machine learning. IBM has user profiling, but they need to strengthen it. It should make sense for the users. It should remove most of the false positives."
"The one thing that I would like to see improved, but I don't think it's going to be in the next release, is its reporting capabilities. I think that's been offloaded to another third-party product that I think IBM actually endorses for that."
"Informatica should simplify the rules for setting classifications and user access management permissions. It's too complex to define, configure, and make work."
"Once the data is masked, we won't be able to reverse it back to its original value."
"The data discovery isn't that good yet for Salesforce. We have another tool that we use for this. It may be a problem because Salesforce on the cloud."
"I have encountered some issues using the substitution, which is one of the techniques of data masking."
"Informatica's support understands the solution, but they lack the experience we need for our use case. That was one thing that we prioritized when we started searching for this kind of solution."
More IBM Security Guardium Data Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security Guardium Data Protection is ranked 1st in Database Security with 70 reviews while Informatica Persistent Data Masking is ranked 6th in Data Masking with 5 reviews. IBM Security Guardium Data Protection is rated 8.2, while Informatica Persistent Data Masking is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Security Guardium Data Protection writes "Provides visibility, has a single console that shows all information, and collector-aggregator capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Informatica Persistent Data Masking writes "Enables secure data protection during testing and controlled access to sensitive information". IBM Security Guardium Data Protection is most compared with Imperva SecureSphere Database Security, Oracle Audit Vault, Oracle Advanced Security, DataSunrise Database Security and Delphix, whereas Informatica Persistent Data Masking is most compared with Delphix, Protegrity Data Security, IBM InfoSphere Optim, Imperva SecureSphere Database Security and Oracle GoldenGate. See our IBM Security Guardium Data Protection vs. Informatica Persistent Data Masking report.
We monitor all Database Security 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.