Symantec Data Loss Prevention Reviews

The most valuable features of Symantec Data Loss Prevention are endpoint security,  endpoint agent, and DLP. Additionally, we have been satisfied with the policies.

Symantec Data Loss Prevention could improve by having better system resource management, cloud option, and more features.

I have been using Symantec Data Loss Prevention for approximately eight years.

The solution is stable.

I have been satisfied with the technical support.

The price of Symantec Data Loss Prevention could be reduced.

I rate Symantec Data Loss Prevention an eight out of ten.

Symantec Data Loss Prevention is used for endpoints to protect users from data leaks.

Symantec Data Loss Prevention is the number one product in its field. It does its job well and it has all the necessary features. It is definitely better than any other solution on the market.

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.

I have been using Symantec Data Loss Prevention for approximately five years.

Symantec Data Loss Prevention is reliable and stable.

The solution is highly scalable.

We have approximately 50 people using this solution in my organization.

We have not needed to contact technical support. We have our own internal team that handles support.

We did the implementation of the solution.

The solution should be less expensive to allow more people the opportunity to use it. Some of their competitors are less expensive. There is a license required to use the solution and we purchased an annual license.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Symantec Data Loss Prevention a nine out of ten.

• Detects the percentages of text and interrogate words within documents and emails.
• Finds leaks of documents and restricted controlled information.
  

We use it to discover unacceptable employee behavior, such as threats and bullying. It helps us identify insider threats.

I would like to see a reduction in false positives.

I have used this solution for three years.

There haven’t been stability issues with the product. There have been stability issues with the user community when trying to embargo documents.

There were no scalability issues other than some impact on sending large documents when tracking content for restricted data.

The technical support has been excellent. We had DLP engineers on site.

The installation was pretty straightforward. We had to adjust for policy allowances. Once the user community gained some experience, we were able to expand the scope.

I have no real comment as we had an enterprise license. Make sure you cover all users and plan growth metrics.

We evaluated alternative solutions, but I can't recall which ones. We had an enterprise license and the product integrated with the SIEM well. There was little reason to go outside of the existing contracts.

Take the following steps:

1. Go to monitoring for 90 days.
2. Start to reduce the allowed events. Start at 100 and reduce by 20 per month.
3. Communicate any failures. (Allow for application changes, as legacy apps may be guilty of data transfer that is embedded in the architecture/file transfer.)

DLP's most valuable feature is compliance.

DLP doesn't work well with Mac OS systems and tends to give false positives. There are also problems in terms of CPU utilization because all the policies are based on a traditional DLP system, which makes it quite heavy and creates issues with user experience. In the next release, DLP should include OCR features, and I'd like the agent to be lightweight, which means the policy should be in the cloud.

I've been using Symantec DLP for two to three years.

I don't find DLP stable.

DLP has no issues with scalability.

Since being acquired by Broadcom, the support has really degraded for small and medium enterprises. They don't help with anything and just send emails when we ask them to come on call.

Negative

The initial setup was easy.

DLP could be a bit cheaper.

I would rate DLP as five out of ten.

I am using the current version.

We are planning to implement OCT, which we consider a valuable feature. 

We also like the maintenance pack for bug inspection. We encountered many bugs, especially with the Endpoint MP1, the MP2 being the other one. 

I would like to see an improved interface, with better documentation and integration with other products.

The initial setup could also be better, so that the solution would easily interact with other monitoring tools without the need for taking further steps. 

I have been using Symantec Data Loss Prevention for four or five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is definitely scalable. 

For non-critical issues, technical support lends email assistance. Otherwise, we will work with the log. For critical issues they talk with us by phone.  

The initial setup is easy.  

I cannot comment on the price, as this is in the purview of the finance team. 

I rate Symantec Data Loss Prevention as an eight out of ten. 

Where we are so far deployed is into the financial sector and in telecom, and they want to evaluate what kind of information users are usually trying to touch, which they're not supposed to be touched. They want to see that analysis. If there are any outflows, they want to mediate that as well - especially if there is any breach on the team.

Overall, it is an excellent product.

The product is stable. 

Technical support is very professional and responsive.

It's not a scalable product.

It only works on the Windows platform. It doesn't support Linux, which is unfortunate. Most of the clients these days use Linux. It would be ideal if Symantec could have more integrations with the different operating systems as well on the DLP. That would be much better.

The deployment is complex.

We have been dealing with Data Loss Prevention since 2008.

The stability of the solution is great. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution isn't very scalable. A company can expand if they need to.

I currently have three customers using the solution at this point. 

Technical support is good. They are responsive and professional and the solution is stable. Clients are well looked after.

On the DLP side, we do Forcepoint and Symantec. It depends on the client and, and at which stage of the business cycle you are engaged with the end-user. If someone's already engaged with Symantec, then it's no use to follow up on the same product with the client. In that scenario, we go for Forcepoint. If the client is new and we are initiators of the solution, in that case, we prefer Symantec.

The installation of Symantec DLP is not straightforward. You need to understand the concept of the technology before you can deploy it. It's not as simple or straightforward and a certain level of skill set is definitely required. 

You need one engineer, a person in presales, and a backup in order to deploy the product.

Customers do have to pay a yearly licensing fee in order to use the solution.

The solution is deployed mostly on-premises, however, you can have agents on the cloud as well, and data classification can be done there. The server can be deployed on the cloud. It can be a hybrid as well. That said, it's mostly deployed on-prem.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for data loss prevention and confidential classification for internal public architecture.

We are trying to prevent the data loss of sensitive files that are confidential, and not let them out of the organization's control.

The dashboard, management section, and reporting are good.

We are having support issues. We had local support but since the acquisition, the support is now only five teams. It is very difficult to log in to create a support ticket because no one is available to support our queries. In India, it's especially needed.

It has some feature deficiencies, as well. For example, it won't monitor the remote desktop and the file-sharing to the RDP. It's not detecting it and RDP is not supported well. The issue is not only with RDP, but rather it's with the product used to provide the remote support. If the data is leaked through that application, then Symantec doesn't monitor that section.

There are some features that are not available, which are required by every data loss prevention solution.

In the next release, encryption should be available. For example, if an extended drive is plugged into the endpoint and someone tried to copy the data to the external drive, the Symantec DLP component doesn't encrypt the drive. If you want the encryption feature you have to purchase an additional component for it. This could be an integral part of Symantec today.

This solution is stable. We have not experienced any issues.

There is a problem with technical support. It's not available.

I submitted a case two months ago, and still, I have not received a response.

We deployed locally in our environment. All of the channels such as emails, web, and endpoints are covered.

The pricing is reasonable.

Technical support is very poor. I am frustrated and irritated by the issue, so it is difficult to offer advice or recommend this solution.

If someone would ask me if they should implement this solution, I would have to say no, only because of the support issue. It is a very big concern.

I would rate this solution a four out of ten.

The solution is pretty stable. They are not bad; they are pretty complete. But I'm not a big fan of Symantec.

The most valuable feature is file-level DLP. It gives the possibility of creating rules; it's possible to know when a file is with the laptop or computer and servers. It can be any type of file.

The console is not the best one. There is room for improvement in the management console. 

I have been working with this solution for one year now. 

The stability is good enough. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. We have this in all geographies nowadays. So, it's very scalable.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. Because it's not only a question of technicality, it's a question of privacy, it knows everything, so I don't like it much.