Azure Firewall Manager vs Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention comparison

"The solution is very easy to set up."

"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."

"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."

"It is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."

"The tool's support is good."

"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."

"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."

"I like the sensitivity labels and data security posture management for AI."

"The product is easy to configure."

"The product has improved compliance and confidence. We are aware of the data that is leaving our organization. It provides confidence in data management and information storage."

"When you are going to use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, most of the setup is already done by default as per your needs."

"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."

"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."

"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."

"Because everything is on Microsoft and we use Azure, integration with the product is easier. That's the most important thing when you use many Microsoft products. It's easier to integrate everything in one place."

"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."

"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly."

"There should be a simple one-click deployment for a firewall, rather than a set of setup instructions that include steps such as the DNS configuration, et cetera."

"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."

"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users."

"We could do only one-way NAT-ing, where the traffic comes from outside to internal, to Azure, which is fine. However, when we actually do NAT-ed traffic to hit the firewall, that way is not working."

"The tool's security features need to improve. It needs also to include a monitoring system for logs. It is also complicated to find a query on the Azure firewall."

"All the security operations are better defined in Forcepoint, while in Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, you will have to use a specific workflow and then an application to release blocked emails."

"I would like Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to be on the source code or SQL databases. It is difficult to do classification and labeling when you have a third-party source code or a third-party Oracle database. It is seamless when it comes to Microsoft documents but is not so with third-party source codes. Microsoft needs to work on it a little bit more."

"Some main features are limited in comparison to other solutions."

"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."

"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."

"More training for end users on how it works would be beneficial."

"It could cover more solutions and technologies."

"The price of the solution is reasonable but it is reasonable for the features."

"The solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."

"It is a part of our Microsoft licensing. We pay for a yearly renewal. Its price is reasonable for the size of the organization we are. It is fairly competitive, and you get what you pay for. We have an E5 license, and a part of understanding the E5 license is to see what all you get with it. If you really look at it from that standpoint, you get a lot of value. You have Defender and all its security features in there as well. Their licensing is fairly flexible. They have different programs. We've seen ones where you could pay for up to three to five years in advance. There is also a monthly pay-as-you-go type of deal, but we're doing a yearly renewal and fixing the budget."

"The solution’s pricing is reasonable."

"You get the solution in a bundle if you get the E5 suite."

"It's a little bit pricey compared to competitors, but it's not too high."

"If one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the price as one out of ten."

"I am satisfied with the tool's pricing."

"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is part of a bundle and is not sold as a standalone product."

"The product has the best price-to-performance ratio."