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

"The product is easy to configure."

"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."

"The auto-labeling feature is definitely the most valuable feature. It goes in and labels the documents for you in different repositories. It covers the Outlook and Exchange repositories along with SharePoint and OneDrive. It is really helpful in those areas."

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

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

"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."

"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."

"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."

"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."

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

"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."

"The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement."

"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."

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

"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."

"The support is poor."

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

"The AI advancements can improve the false positives."

"Technical support is awful."

"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."

"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."

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

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

"The pricing is reasonable."

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

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

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

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

"It's expensive."

"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."

"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."