Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention comparison

"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."

"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."

"The solution's IDM (Indexed Document Matching), EDM (Exact Data Matching), and DCM (Described Content Matching) features have been most effective in identifying and mitigating potential data leaks."

"The most valuable features are identifying sensitive data and issuing alerts."

"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."

"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."

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

"Our clients primarily deploy Palo Alto Networks Enterprise DLP to control the flow of information in and out of their networks. The main use cases include monitoring and managing sensitive data such as credit card information and personally identifiable information."

"It is a stable solution with good support."

"Another important feature is that the solution doesn't require any additional infrastructure to implement. It's a software license that is compatible with our existing hardware. We were able to install and configure the product seamlessly and effortlessly."

"It is highly scalable, allowing for an increasing number of users."

"The setup is very easy as we just need to switch on and switch off."

"We faced a performance issue with the tool when we didn't get alerts for file uploads."

"Technical support is awful."

"The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options."

"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 tool's user interface and document fingerprinting have been very poor for my customers because uploading files manually can be problematic."

"The solution should provide better integration with other systems."

"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."

"A major improvement is required in the solution's incident handling and alerting."

"Its scalability is not on par with the features of others."

"It has heavy agents."

"There is room for improvement in the documentation around the maintenance of the product, how the automatic updates work, and pushing out new policies. A little more detail and context in that area would be helpful."

"You need to have an external solution to backup everything. For example, you need to have Syslog installed on your server as well so that you can back it up to another place."

"The solution needs improvement in stability. There has been feedback regarding the accuracy of file categorization."

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

"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."

"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 pricing is reasonable."

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

"Though I am not a specialist, the tool is quite expensive."

"We are using the E3 license for Microsoft 365 with the E5 compliance license add-on."

"The licensing model is very fair-minded and it's a good value. It scales well... Its licensing model is more streamlined when compared to other DLP solutions."

"The pricing of the solution depends on the buyers. But, from my point of view, it is in line with the rest of the products and the price list of Palo Alto."

"Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention is expensive, and licensing costs are monthly."

"It's expensive."