McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Reviews

This solution is for credit card protection; credit card numbers, any kind of data storage and data flows from storage to an application, it all goes through DLP filters and policies.

This solution has a rich set of policies and provides a level of protection even for removable devices.

The challenge now is the ability to have sensors, monitoring, and general security and policies on IOT devices. It's a challenge every time I use it and it's been frustrating. There are a lot of vulnerabilities and people can interrogate devices on a network and proliferate different forms of viruses or malware to infect a lot of things within the whole enterprise.

DLP was a very difficult solution to set up and use. It took an expert with a lot of experience to do that for us. It's very hard to implement across the enterprise with the different faces of where the DLP engines live. One of the challenges was that we weren't setting a generic policy, we have many different levels we're dealing with. It touches so many different things that it takes an army to maintain.

The solution is license based and is expensive. Every user, device, file, everything is licensed. There are many layers to licensing costs. It takes a lot of expertise and a lot of work to set that up across the enterprise.

ManTech was a better solution than McAfee but then it was bought out and that sometimes means that development isn't complete and feature richness is lacking. There is a tendency to move backward in capabilities. When it comes to McAfee, DLP works flawlessly while other parts struggle. 

We've used the solution mostly for antivirus and malware protection only. There's some scanning of emails, phishing websites, and then also scanning my pen drive or hard drive or external hard drives.

It's good in that it does what it is intended to do.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is easy to set up.

The solution takes up too much CPU and memory.

I've used the solution for a few years. It's been about six or seven years. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

I'm not sure about the scalability. I only use it for personal devices and have never attempted to expand it.

I'm using the solution myself. No one else uses it. 

I've never had an issue with McAfee. I've never had to reach out to technical support.

I'm also familiar with Kaspersky and Norton Security Premium.

I previously used an open-source solution, however, that was six or seven years ago.

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. it's not overly complex or difficult. 

The deployment only takes five to ten minutes. It's pretty fast.

You can do the deployment yourself. It doesn't require any help per se. 

I pay a yearly licensing fee which is about $1000 in my local currency. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I'm happy with its capabilities. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the product as an anti-virus solution. It prevents virus attacks on my laptops and mobile phones. 

I am impressed with the tool's firewalls and web protection. 

I would like the solution to improve the AI features for anti-virus detection. I also want the software to include a tool for malware detection. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

I have used other anti-virus products like Sophos and Kaspersky. I switched to McAfee because it is easier to use and has more features than others. 

The tool is easy to setup. I would rate the product's setup an eight out of ten. The product's deployment takes 10-15 minutes to complete. 

I would rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

We are a solutions provider. We make recommendations to people and companies concerning virtualization solutions, server solutions, file sharing and things of this nature. So we also need to protect servers or client machines or PCs and so often we need to recommend the purchase of some antivirus solutions. McAfee is one of the solutions we use in our recommendations.  

It provides us with an excellent solution to recommend to clients for security.  

One of the most valuable things for us about this product is that we needed some solution that can be used in desktop virtualization. We are not using the antivirus program in common ways. We use antivirus in desktop virtualization.  

The most important solution for us is protecting the virtual machines that we host on our servers. We need security protection for our clients and server solutions, security protection for virtual desktop solutions and security for the cloud-based system solutions. We work in all of these fields.  

One thing that would help us is if the McAfee agent that we install on virtual machines became lighter. It is a bit heavy for installation on virtual machines and it uses too much in the way of resources. It takes a lot of the CPU, the RAM, and other resources in comparison to some other application like Kaspersky. Kaspersky Security Solution is a lighter solution than McAfee. McAfee is a little heavy for many installations and does not work for all clients and situations.  

It would also be good if the McAfee solution contained specialized features just for the virtual desktop. Some brands of security solutions already have this type of feature which makes it easier to use them for desktop virtualization. I can not find that currently in the McAfee product.  

We have been using this product for about 10 years for some internal solutions and for our clients.  

Of course, a product like this has to be designed to be stable. The whole point of McAfee is to be a stable, dependable solution for total security.  

In our experience, the product is easy to scale both on server and desktop visualization.  

The number of clients we have using McAfee Total Protection for data within our company and within our client deployments is hard to say in total. We have lots of clients in various territories. We work in five countries in the Middle East. So I don't know the exact number of users, but I know there are more than 1,000 SMBs, or small to medium businesses, that we have deployed for.  

The users at each site are IT Managers, IT Admin, Security Admins or some type of IT expert for the administration.  

I have previous and current experience in usage of some other security applications like McAfee, like Kaspersky, like BitDefender, and like SOPHOS. So I have experience with a lot of these kinds of products and know which to recommend for particular purposes in deployments. We use McAfee because it fits certain client needs but we still sometimes use other solutions for other clients. Everyone is not the same.  

We also have our own security solutions and we do not use only third-party applications in our company. We have an ISMS (information security management system) that we customize for what we need it to do.  

For the Data Security product, McAfee is easy to install and it is easy to use. This is not the setup and usability that are part of the problem when it comes to this product.  

We do our own implementations.  

I did consider other options from the other vendors I've worked with before. I had kind of a friendly connection with the BitDefender company, for example. But when it comes down to making a choice for clients I have to tell them that the application is the heaviest security program. It uses the most resources of any of the products I know well, so it was not really a good solution for us to recommend. Their solution uses more resources than even McAfee. 

Advice that I would give to others looking into implementing this solution is the same as when our customers ask us for any kind of security solution. We almost always recommended that they go with McAfee. McAfee is a great choice for most cases.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate McAfee Total Protection for Data as a nine out of ten. It is very good except for the resource drain.  

Customers mainly use McAfee Total Data Loss Prevention to protect sensitive data on PCs, ATM machines, and email servers. It stops unauthorized data leaks, uses encryption for security, and enforces data rules on devices and networks. It also helps find sensitive info, handles data breaches, and ensures compliance. It is crucial for organizations to keep their data safe in different parts of their IT systems.

The most valuable feature is strong data leak prevention for data protection.

In terms of improvement, it could improve how it deals with solar data. It should be converted to Trellix as soon as possible. We currently don't fully understand Trelix, but we hope to gain a better understanding when they present it to our team. We are looking forward to their presentation, and we believe it will help us provide valuable feedback.

I have been using the solution for three months at my current company, but I have experience with clients using it for numerous years at my previous job.

The solution is scalable and most of our company's clients who use it are enterprise businesses. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is smooth, especially when handling data in Gmail. We typically collaborate with local IT partners who manage email services for our customers, which simplifies the process. It takes about a month and a half to implement the solution at a company with 2,000 users. For a smaller company with 20-50 users, it takes three to four days. The deployment process involves downloading the software, installing it on the servers, and then exploring its functionalities.

Overall, I would rate McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention an eight out of ten.

We are a consulting firm and this is one of the solutions that we implement for our clients.

Our customers primarily use it to protect local files that they are saving to external devices.

The most valuable feature is the ability to control access to USB drives and other external devices.

The interface is very complicated to use and it is easy to forget how it works.

There needs to be support for blocking the sending of files by email because even if you block or remove an external disk, the files are not protected. As long as the files can still be sent via email, it is useless to protect them from being copied to an external drive.

I have been working with this McAfee data protection product for more than two years.

Scalability is not really applicable because it is only dealing with an endpoint device. There is no impact on scalability.

I have not been in contact with McAfee's technical support.

Symantec has a similar solution available.

The initial setup is complex. The configuration requires that many points have to be considered before it can be done properly.

The price is high for this type of product.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

We use the solution to remove sensitive information from emails or Word documents. It can also help with monitoring. 

The tool focuses on endpoints rather than networks. Endpoints cover everything. It wouldn't be possible to steal confidential information from endpoints. 

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention needs to improve the resources it uses for CPU and RAM. 

I have been using the product for one to two years. 

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is stable. 

The product is scalable. 

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention's technical support is helpful. 

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention's deployment is straightforward and takes 30-40 minutes to complete. You need to configure it to the part that needs to be filtered out. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. 

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is expensive. 

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

The beauty of McAfee Data Loss Prevention is, for one, it's in a single management product for all other McAfee solutions. It's also a single-agent platform. That's one really unique aspect of Data Loss Prevention. 

The configuration of McAfee is also pretty straightforward. 

On the data loss prevention side, it's pretty straightforward. It's capable of doing the basic tasks such as basic data loss prevention capabilities that any DLP can do. 

With respect to its capability of being able to block, being able to provide responses and justification, and the management of the DLP in itself, it is pretty straightforward. 

One thing that I like about McAfee is the Tamper Protection and the help desk feature. Symantec also has that, however, the help desk feature from McAfee is more user-friendly but also it's more strict and more secure, as compared to the one in Symantec.

The pricing of the product is excellent. It's very affordable. 

In my experience, it's not really user-friendly for me, in terms of how I navigate with the ePolicy Orchestrator. They need to upgrade their management console. 

You can't navigate McAfee without going through all of the administration and product guides. You have to read everything first before you navigate it. That's how it was for me, at least, in my experience. However, in my colleague's case, that didn't happen and I don't know why I can't just navigate the McAfee management console without reading first the administrator or product guide. What's really tedious about reading those things is that the documents are separate. The product guide and the administrator guide for the DLP solution are quite different from the administrator guide and product guide of the ePolicy Orchestrator.

They need to improve more with partial matching and exact data matching. The partial matching and the exact data matching are features of Symantec. There, it's pretty sophisticated. If McAfee wants to catch up with that, they have to upgrade their partial matching capabilities.

We also had a client who wanted to have at least three, two to three, set of conditions on a single policy or on a single rule, to have that kind of combination. For example, a combination of a serial number from a device, from a removable device, plus a user and a computer or the hosting or the workstation. That's three combinations. User, computer, and removable device. What they wanted is to have the three pieces of that combination in a single rule, however, we were not able to do that as McAfee conditional statements are only limited to two. That's something that they need also to improve. They need to make it more flexible.

I've used McAfee for three years at this point. It's been a while. 

McAfee offers very good technical support and we have been very happy with its capabilities. We find support to be helpful and responsive. 

I also work with Symantec. It's a bit more expensive, and I find McAfee offers a few better, more advanced features. 

This is one of the least expensive solutions on the market right now. It's even less expensive than Symantec.

I'm using the latest version of the solution at this time. 

The clients I work with are mostly enterprise-level businesses. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. For the most part, I have been pleased with its capabilities, however, there are some improvements that could be made.