What is our primary use case?
We use it for encrypting data and storage for the most part. We keep it up to date in terms of the version.
How has it helped my organization?
It basically brings us in compliance. We are required to encrypt the handling of data, the transmission of the data, and storage of the data. So, when people are working with the data, and they download it to the laptops, we can safely say it is encrypted at that point to meet our requirements. It is pretty transparent to the end-user since the encryption is done without them really doing it.
Our need was to protect our portable devices. So, our thumb drives get automatically encrypted. Any attached storage gets automatically encrypted for our laptops in case they get lost or stolen when people travel.
What is most valuable?
I liked the way it works with our Microsoft tools. As we roll out Intune, we can validate if the device has been encrypted, and if not, we can push it down. It is pretty simple to deploy.
What needs improvement?
Their interoperability with our tools, which are the Microsoft tool, can be improved. It needs to be geared towards more of the wraparound of the zero trust. There are solutions we're looking at that do encryption plus X, Y, and Z. So, we're looking at the ability to wrap around the product with other features.
The biggest one for us is revoking access. So, even though someone downloads something to a device, we want the ability to cloak that device or data and bring it back or make that data unusable for that person. Currently, BitLocker doesn't give us that ability. It basically encrypts it. We're seeing if identity management or IAM allows us to do that. We're kind of looking at third-party software that does that for us.
Usually, Microsoft sees what other third-party companies do and then either adopts it or buys the third-party company, and that's kind of what we're looking into. That's our need. It'd be a lot better if it was all under one mirror or one window, instead of having a couple of different vendors working on it. So, if Microsoft could solve that, it would be awesome. They should look at the third-party enhancements that people are doing, and then take the encryption a step further by adding those features to BitLocker. Microsoft has different components. They have identity management, but is it tied to encryption? BitLocker is mostly tied to devices, but it would be best for me if I get a piece of data and I am able to encrypt it all the way through using BitLocker. Currently, BitLocker is basically tied at the device level instead of the data level.
I would just like them to look at what other people are doing in terms of encryption as a whole and offer the encryption not only tied to the device, but also to the file level. They should add features on that in terms of access control and reporting. We should be able to see who has access to it and who has touched a file. So, we're going towards the zero trust model and the zero trust reporting. It is a "We don't trust anybody" type of deal. So, it is not just the device, it is the data. They should try to wrap it around the data at the file level and not at the device level.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for about three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
So far, so good. We haven't had too many problems with managing the keys or anything else. Probably the only concern is that we manage it. Individuals are not doing it themselves. The other thing is as we take over companies or merge companies, or the other way around, we have to make sure that we get those keys to the kingdom per se. So, we always got to look out for that as well.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
So far, so good. Mostly, anything we deal with Microsoft is pretty scalable. Again, it is kind of tied to devices, but you can essentially manage it, which makes it simple.
In terms of its usage, we force it on everybody, so it is non-binding. No matter who you are in a company, if you have a managed device, it is going to be encrypted. It is a requirement, so it is being used extensively. Its usage will increase as the number of employees increase.
How are customer service and technical support?
I don't think we've had many issues with them. We push it through our SolarWinds product, so for most of the issues we've had, we probably had to deal with SolarWind's side to make sure that everything was pushed correctly. We didn't go to the Microsoft side. Our software vendor might have dealt with Microsoft directly but not us.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
The only solutions that we've had in place were standalone encrypted thumb drives. We had not rolled out BitLocker until then, so we had a need to encrypt thumb drives. We had bought Aegis thumb drives that came encrypted. After we got the encryption rolled out, when someone connected a thumb drive, it was automatically encrypted, or they couldn't store data on it. Once we went to that method, we didn't purchase any more Aegis encrypted thumb drives.
How was the initial setup?
We have it on-prem, and we have a couple of devices in the cloud, but we are a hybrid environment. Our main thing was to get it on our traveling laptops and protect them. We push it through another vendor, not Microsoft. We push it through another SolarWinds vendor, and then we push it down. The only thing that we've had problems with was that the encryption level wasn't as high as we needed it by default. So, we had to do some tweaking to get the correct encryption level that we wanted. It is all default. So, you have to be aware of how you deploy it. If you deploy it one way, it doesn't really fully encrypt the machine.
It took days only because it was a slow rollout. It was intentionally a slow rollout. It didn't take long to do it, but we just wanted to make sure it was done right and correctly.
What about the implementation team?
We just implemented it in-house. In terms of maintenance, it is a small staff. We rely on our software to help us with the patching and everything. We have reports that kickback to us. If for some reason, encryption was turned off or encryption wasn't deployed correctly, we'd get reports sent to us. So, a lot of stuff is automated in terms of monitoring the compliance to encryptions, and our response to that is pretty fast. We just manage it with our current staff. We don't have anybody directly tied to just doing that.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I don't know the costs. In terms of Microsoft licensing, we are at E3 on the business, and we're in the process of pricing out and moving to E5. So, a lot of this is included within our licensing agreements.
What other advice do I have?
If you don't implement this, you have to implement something else. You have to have some type of encryption. In the past, people wanted a layered approach to security. They wanted to have different vendors, and they wanted it to be able to have that overlap of vendor support on security, but the reality is that everybody looks to Microsoft. If you look at the SolarWind attack, who do they go to help resolve it? They went straight to Microsoft. Therefore, we're getting away from that thought process of divide and conquer. We're just trying to align everything up with a single pane of glass so that we can build on our Microsoft tools. In the past, we would have resisted being tied to one security.
I can't rate it any lower than eight out of 10. The only reason why I don't rate it a 10 is that they can do more with it. It is good at what it does, but it needs to do more. It is never going to get a 10 from me because it is never going to be perfect, but there is more to do.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.