IBM Security Guardium Data Protection vs Oracle Data Masking and Subsetting comparison

"We have integrated IBM Guardium​ with IBM Watson Curator. They access Curator to identify and correlate other actions the user is doing to determine if this is a legitimate action or not."

"Supports security initiatives and ensures compliance policies."

"It's allowing us to be more proactive than reactive on alerts and access rights and types of resources that are being hit. Before, there were a lot of different solutions, but this expanded that out and made it a more holistic solution. It provides centralization of monitoring, instead of multiple, disparate applications. It definitely allows more economies of scale, streamlining, less fragmented use."

"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."

"This is a multi-platform solution that consolidates everything and centralizes support for it."

"The product has proven to be flexible"

"I think IMB's technical support is good."

"It provides us regulatory compliance proof and evidence for audit."

"This solution delivers the value that it is supposed to deliver."

"We are currently facing a challenge because it does not offer data encryption by default, only data masking."

"Flexibility could be improved."

"The backup and recovery is very resource-hungry and requires a huge amount of storage capacity."

"The technical support is very poor."

"It was difficult implementing it, configuring it, getting it up and running and in production. However, since then, I believe it has stabilized."

"The main issue I have with IBM Security Guardium Data Protection is the support. It's not good."

"Guardium's storage capabilities could use some improvement. I'd also like to have some better integration using digital technology or a connector."

"If IBM Guardium Data Protection could find a way to not have a lot of coding and development required to get the solution up and running it would be an advantage. The information of the agent could improve, which is necessary for us to monitor the databases would be a great benefit."

"There are not a lot of templates available to use, so we had to start many things from scratch."

"Guardium has not saved us time or money."

"Guardium is most suitable for large scale enterprises because the pricing model is better if you are implementing a large number of databases."

"Reasonable cost but could be lower."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

"IBM Guardium Data Protection charges you based on the number of users, e.g. based on the number of licenses, and it's either on a per-license or a per-data basis."

"The price of Guardium is higher than the main competitor, Imperva. In addition, it's complex as the calculation of the licensing is done by Processor Value Unit (PVU). However, before purchasing a DAP solution, it is important to analyze specific points to evaluate the cost-benefit of each tool. For example: Does the environment to be monitored have mainframes? If so, it's a point for Guardium. If not, a point for Imperva. Note: IBM is looking into a new licensing policy and reducing the price of Guardium."

"The product's pricing is reasonable and affordable. It is in the moderate range."

"The biggest challenge is the cost associated with the product, and the cost of maintaining. Everything is not translated directly to the benefits we see. There are benefits, yes, but if I were writing the check, would I buy Guardium? No."