Symantec Data Loss Prevention Reviews

• 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.)

Previously, what was happening was that anyone could send any data outside. We now know who is sending what data and where. We can then question them: "Why have you sent that data?"

In DLP one of the most valuable features is that you can check attachments. 

In addition, it gives me the data such that, if someone is using a browser and email, I'm able to figure out who is sending the data.

Symantec customer support is very bad.

We are finding delayed response if the macOS is updated. They need to make sure their solution is compatible.

Also, if any data at all is going outside of our network and it matches our screening it has to be captured and we should see it detailed properly: Who is sending it, where they're sending it.

The stability has met our expectations.

I'm not good with the scalability. It's not capturing everything. If someone's trying to send from Gmail to some other browser or if someone is using Safari in a Windows machine, under those conditions it's not captured. 

This is the first product of its kind for us. Nobody seemed to know much about this product but we figured out how to use it, and the vendor gave us training, so we have been able to handle it.

The initial setup is a little complex. But once you go through it you get used to it. After using this product it becomes easy to handle, easy to understand. Our deployment took about two months for 2,000 users. 

Our strategy was simple. I needed to implement it for every user so that we could monitor any data.

We used the vendor's support and it was nice working with them. They helped a lot when it came to the deployment.

I wasn't involved in the pricing negotiations but from what I know the pricing is good, it's not too expensive. If you negotiate you can get a good price.

We evaluated multiple solutions, such as McAfee.

We have around 1,500 users in HR, admin, the finance department, and IT. For maintenance of the solution we have two people. It's covering all users at the moment so there are no plans to increase usage.

I rate the solution at eight out of ten. It is fulfilling our requirements.

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.

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.

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. 

I use it in my own environment for data loss prevention.

I installed it for testing purposes. I've logged some of my data through different policies. However, I've only done this at the endpoint channel, not on, for example, email channels.

There's only one policy needed to implement for all channels. That's a good point for Symantec. To have one policy for all channels has been great. You don't have a user workload. You can manage everything through a single policy.

The solution is not user-friendly. I've had to do a lot of research to try and figure things out on my own.

Due to its database, I first had to install an Oracle database. This should change. The product should allow for the use of an SQL database, and, if possible, it should have an embedded database. The solution should be easier to integrate on different solutions.

The data classification is very difficult in Symantec. It's hard to integrate the detect activation tools, whereas, in Forcepoint DLP, it's better. It's very user-friendly and the quality is defined and it is very clear. Symantec should try to emulate those aspects of Forcepoint.

It's difficult to implement in a protected environment, due to its architectural layout.

The initial implementation is quite complex.

The technical support has really dropped in quality since Broadcom acquired the product.

I've used the solution for a month so far and for endpoint channel only. It hasn't been too long. 

The solution is stable. I've seen the people are using it in very large organizations with no problems. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's not buggy. There aren't glitches. However, it's difficult to maintain and run the product.

The solution is quite scalable. From articles I found online, it looks like you can manage around 5,000 to 10,000 endpoints easily through Symantec. You can expand it by quite a bit if you need to.

I've only been using the solution myself over the course of a month. I implemented the solution to two or three other users. I do not plan to increase usage as my intention is to move to another product.

The technical support, after Broadcom acquired Symantec, has been not very good. It used to be maintained by Symantec itself. Since then, there has been a drop off in responsiveness and helpfulness. After being acquired by Broadcom, the support, even at the endpoint level, took two to four days.

We aren't satisfied with the level of support. It should be faster.

This is the first DLP I've used, however, I am switching over to Forcepoint DLP. I'm not staying with Symantec.

the initial setup is not straightforward or simple. It's quite complex.

The whole deployment process took about two days or so.

In Symantec, you have to first install the Oracle database, then you can go on to install the enforce server and then detection servers. It will take time.

I have done the entire installation by myself with the help of some installation guides. I did not contact a consultant or integrator for assistance.

We have a license for our clients. However, in my case, I've only used the trial license in my environment.

I've looked into Forcepoint and it seems to be much better as it's user-friendly and there are some other features that I like. I've just looked into it for comparison purposes. I've never actually used it.

I would recommend this product to other organizations, however, I would warn them it's difficult to maintain due to its architecture.

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.

We primarily use the solution in order to detect the exfiltration.

The exfiltration capabilities are great. You can put all of these rules in the product to detect the patterns and text. You can build the rules to detect credit cards and personal information, for example. 

Technical support, by and large, is very helpful.

In general, it's a solid, dependable product.

The database is a problem for us, as it's running on Oracle and not everybody likes that. There's a licensing issue with the database. There's a sizing issue with licensing. They did improve it a bit. It supports a virtual server now. However, the pricing and the fact that you install it on the machine and you have to count all the CPU, makes it a problem. It's workable. We dedicated a physical machine to it. It's a bit of a legacy solution. 

The licensing is a bit of an issue for us. They need to work on the way the licensing is set up.

A feature we would like to see is entropy detection in text. We need something that detects when you send an email and you try to hide something by using simple encryption techniques. It's typically called entropy. If we had entropy detection in the regular text that would be ideal

I've been working with the solution for about a year. It hasn't been that long.

It's a pretty solid, reliable product. We haven't had any issues with it overall.

We've found the technical support to be quite helpful and responsive. We're very happy with the level of support we receive.

The licensing is an issue. You need to get a dedicated machine. Otherwise, you have to pay for all the CPU in your data center or all the clusters in VMware. It used to be two issues. One was the support of virtualization and one was licensing. In the latest release, they solved the virtualization. They said "Okay, you can run the database and everything could be on the virtual machine", which is great. The other issue of licensing is still a pending issue. We still have to run on the dedicated hardware, however, it needs to be a small cluster or a small machine, to not pay for the entire cluster.

We are Symantec partners.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure of the exact version number, however.

Overall it's an excellent product. It helps you reach your goal and solve some issues. We did it in six months. It's really an excellent product. There is a bit of a legacy component about the database and the way it works. We can see that the evolution of the technology was a bit slow for the backend, however, the product itself is solid.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten overall. We've been largely quite satisfied with its capabilities.