Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and Symantec DLP are data security solutions helping prevent sensitive data leaks. Both offer tiered licensing based on features and deployment options, and ROI depends on implementation complexity and prevented data leaks. Purview's tighter Microsoft integration can lead to faster value realization, while Symantec might offer better ROI for complex environments.
The summary above is based on 35 interviews we conducted recently with Symantec Data Loss Prevention and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"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."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."
"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"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."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"All of the features are really important, including DLP for the OCR and endpoint. It will be all of the combined features that will give you the strength to control the data. Every feature has its own uniqueness, different control and will help you to protect the data."
"The most valuable aspect of Symantec DLP is its powerful policy system."
"The most valuable feature is file-level DLP."
"For detection, it has a great algorithm. It can recognize ID numbers and everything that you put in a policy for the end-users. That is really great for us as an institution where we have sensitive data. It recognizes all the sensitive data when someone tries to transfer it or put in other data."
"The Network Monitor component is the most advanced on the market. Combined with the other Network DLP components."
"The data-at-rest features are the most valuable because they let us identify data infected with ransomware and prevent employees from being exploited through phishing attacks. If an employee is compromised, the attacker can access servers and deposit ransomware. This enables the attacker to exfiltrate data remotely using employees' credentials. It might be valuable data that could cause a business reputational and financial damage if stolen and publicized. It could also be credit card data or personal health information stored on critical servers."
"The synchronize application detection policies have been very good."
"I'm able to track everyone who is trying to send information outside the environment and to know if they are not supposed to be sending it. I'm also able to see the people who are accessing or maybe try to access the information they are not supposed to be accessing based on their level of classification. It gives me overall control of who has got access to what and at what point. And who can do what with specific information."
"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."
"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."
"There is no AIP for Linux systems. That's a setback. Another thing it's lacking is libraries to work with Python. It has libraries for C# and C++, for example, but not for Python and, these days, Python is very useful."
"The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Symantec Data Loss Prevention could improve by having better system resource management, cloud option, and more features."
"There should be more information about the features of the solution and what they do. This way we would be able to use all the features that are available."
"The Symantec DLP solution is very complex, and installation requires many components."
"The deployment is complex."
"The policies need to be improved."
"Symantec Data Loss Prevention's setup needs to be easier and support needs to be improved."
"We are finding delayed response if the macOS is updated. They need to make sure their solution is compatible."
"Reporting could be improved."
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews while Symantec Data Loss Prevention is ranked 3rd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 53 reviews. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0, while Symantec Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention writes "Automation has given us consistent analytics and improved quality of insights into user activity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Data Loss Prevention writes "Consitent, accurate, and simple". Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Amazon Macie, Microsoft Intune, Zscaler DLP and Digital Guardian, whereas Symantec Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian, Zscaler DLP, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Trellix DLP. See our Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs. Symantec Data Loss Prevention report.
See our list of best Data Loss Prevention (DLP) vendors.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Go with Symantec DLP. If you have any questions let me know @ Ejaz.hassan@risetechno.com.