The only thing that I think could be improved is the data classifier. It's not a very robust classifier, which is where its limitation lies. For example, you see a lot of higher-end solutions where people can classify data more effectively, adding labels like transcription labels and such. McAfee’s classifier doesn't handle all those tasks. It doesn’t offer the same level of functionality as other data classification tools. You can't do things like fingerprinting and other advanced classification methods. However, if you were to make it more robust, the product could become too heavy to run effectively on endpoints and servers. So, to be honest, I can't think of anything else off the top of my head that could be added. I think it's a great solution as it stands. If anyone wants extended data classification, they can leverage other tools like Titus, Fortra's Classifier Suite (previously known as Boldon James Classifier), or even Microsoft AIP if they have the budget. You can also leverage Trellix to enhance your data protection. From my point of view, McAfee Complete Data Protection is one of the best solutions out there, if not the best, to be honest.
Senior Vice President IT at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Reseller
Top 5
2023-12-15T05:31:00Z
Dec 15, 2023
There are some areas that need improvement. Firstly, the limited coverage of operating systems is a concern, as McAfee Complete Data Protection currently supports only Windows, leaving out Mac and Linux users. Network DLP integration may not be an advantage then. Furthermore, no US security solution is included in the complete data protection. It is available on the CASB front. Additionally, the availability of presentations and sample reports is lacking, making it challenging for presentations and road shows. The absence of roadshows in India from the solution's end is affecting the introduction of new technologies to Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs). The marketing strategies need to change drastically. I had a deal for seven thousand users, and there's a competitor ready to step in. Being a more aggressive partner could help secure deals and upsell other McAfee products to customers.
Since most companies are going into the cloud now, McAfee needs to adapt to the cloud solution. Currently, it is on-prem. In short, currently, the DLP solution is on-prem. They need to adapt to the cloud environment. I would like the product to be more scalable in the next release.
Learn what your peers think about McAfee Complete Data Protection. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
We had to migrate and upgrade the DLP, and then customers were experiencing some unknown issues. We had to upgrade the Microsoft package on our system.
Some clients still receive spam and malware in their attachments, so the data protection isn't working correctly. We have configured it and enabled the features in the client's system, but some policies have failed to work once or twice.
Cyber Security Consultant & Presale at Innovery
Consultant
2022-07-07T12:20:14Z
Jul 7, 2022
The solution already has a lot of really great features. Nothing is missing. As a new technology, it does need to grow. They need to continue to grow security aspects.
They could be better in terms of Complete Data Protection. There are a lot of components that get involved there. I would like to see a bit more stability. The initial setup process could be simpler.
There are compatibility issues with the Chrome browser. The DLP works absolutely fine with the internet and the Firefox browser, however, it doesn't support Chrome. That's the only drawback of the DLP. Even if there is a new patch released in Chrome, McAfee DLP doesn't support it. There are a lot of incidents that are being captured and there is no option for deleting the older incidents from the console. However, if you want to treat that incident, then I think there is some task that has to be done and it doesn't work in the right way. We had to run some more subscriptions this year to reduce the incidents.
Senior Technical Team Lead at Foresight Software Solutions Pvt Ltd
Reseller
2021-03-12T09:11:20Z
Mar 12, 2021
The full set of features are enabled only for Windows. There are some features that do not work with Mac. With respect to device control, it can be quite limited for Mac. With Mac, we experience problems with post-related issues, with the device controller, and with email-related listings. Network communication is another thing. Certain rules just do not work for our Mac environments. The security could also be improved when it comes to Mac. Most of our customers ask for these features. They want these same features for their Mac devices. We're just hosts — it's up to McAfee to provide these features. They should also offer encryption and device control for Linux.
There is a feature called manual classification that is not intuitive to use and can be improved. There was an option for SQL setup in the older versions of this product and it has been removed, but we would like to see it made available as an add-on.
I think in looking at this as to how it can be improved, the drive encryption side is not as straightforward as it could be. It is a little bit heavy on the configuration part. There are a lot of options to look at. Maybe it is just that the training needs to fine-tuned a little bit or maybe the UI needs to be a little more interactive. There are so many options that you have in the product that you may not know exactly what something does if you enable an option. There is a gray area, for example, as to whether or not it is best practice is to have a pre-boot authentication or not. The usual argument is that if you do not turn on pre-boot authentication, your encryption can actually be bypassed. There is a question and it is not an argument that you can easily answer because the product is not doing enough to help you out. They need a publication that actually sets that record straight, or probably they could have something like a best practice configuration guide so users can take advantage of that for determining exactly what options are best for them. People do not always know what are the best practices for their environment. They try out a lot of stuff, and then if it does not work with their system, they just come to the conclusion that the solution does not work. They blame the product rather than the configuration which they do not have set correctly. So with a best practice configuration guide or something similar, it would help people take proper advantage of the solution and help them to better see the total benefits of what the solution has to offer. So their configuration is complex, but this can have advantages as well if they provided the user with the information they need.
Senior Cyber Security Consultant at Ingram Micro Inc.
Real User
2020-03-16T06:56:17Z
Mar 16, 2020
The solution needs more advanced features. Customers tend to not like the navigation that is offered. While accessing the DLP is easy, navigating inside of it is difficult. The policies and propagation need to be improved. The solution should integrate more into the Cloud. McAfee is not focusing too much on the Cloud. They need to do so.
Application Programmer (Infrastructure and OA support) at a government with 11-50 employees
Real User
2020-03-10T08:19:00Z
Mar 10, 2020
Well expectedly, the upgrade process from Orchestrator v5.32 to 5.91 will be a bit painful for a lengthy and hardly completed client saturation (i.e. ensuing endpoint upgrade, if not done after server & SHA cert update committed, the client(s) will completely fail to work again) for our 1300+ endpoints. These included PCs and offline notebooks, which cannot be easily kept online over an extended period of time waiting for saturation in an undetermined upgrade order. I would like to have an easier and less-hassle upgrade process in future releases of the software, and extra license renewal price discounts too. Procurement/license renewal options should also be devised by McAfee for continually incremental buying by an organization over its lifetime of usage. Additionally, export and re-import of encryption keys in a batch could also be available as an extra orchestrator module for seamless transfer in case of server migration/re-installation. Noticeably, the disk encryption process is far swifter on PCs/notebooks equipped with SSD drives but a speed improvement should better be available in future releases for mechanical disk drives for still being existent in the years to come.
Presales Manager at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
2019-12-23T07:05:00Z
Dec 23, 2019
The improvement that I think most needs to be addressed is a claim from many customers that I receive all the time. They say that the product consumes too much RAM and CPU. It makes clones in the machine and that eats up resources. It makes the clone as long as it is running on the machine. The problem is big enough for users that I need to have another smart, reliable solution that can be deployed instead if the customer does not have the hardware to allow the product to consume the needed volume of RAM and CPU. If McAfee were able to do all it does without stealing so much of the resources on a machine, I would not have this problem of having to consider other deployments.
The refresh feature needs improvement. You need to refresh it manually yt going to the address bar, clicking on it and pressing enter, or pressing F5. There should be a button you can click on to refresh or have it so every five seconds it's refreshing. QTs should be drag and drop. The solution should allow for a bit more customization. The reporting is good, but could use improvement. Right now you can export it as a PDF or CSV but these options will not make your design available. They should be more visual.
IT Lead\Network Security Analyst at Oiltest Services Limited
Real User
2019-11-04T06:14:00Z
Nov 4, 2019
When it comes to the integration, the information or instruction that comes with the package is not good. When you are getting started it's not easy to integrate it, there are many things involved. If you are a beginner you can easily become confused, but if you have experience then it can be easy. In the next release, I would like to see some additional product features added to the interface. There should be more public awareness or comparisons in the market. People are still questioning why I chose McAfee. I want simplicity. A new user opening the dashboard will be confused. It needs to be more user-friendly.
The solution needs to reduce the number of false positives. There are too many of them. In future releases, McAfee Endpoint Protection needs to also include a module for mobile devices. If they do this, they should ensure the feature caters to both Android and iOS.
I don't like this solution because it is difficult to manage endpoints, policies, algorithm engines, and products. We can't control how it works with Outlook or the browser. You can't control the application over the browser to Google Chrome, Google Drive, or OneDrive. It is difficult to manage. Support needs improvement. They take days to get back to you and are not always able to help. This solution is not stable, other solutions are better. In the next release, I would like to see more work done with the Browsers or to have a cloud control application.
If you compare this solution with next-generation products like CrowdStrike, you will find that it should be easier to work on and therefore more user-friendly. With this solution, data protection is not straightforward. So McAfee should focus more on ease of management and user-friendliness. I would also like to have an option to migrate from the old environment to the new, graphical environment. The interface itself is not easy for administrators because they have to check everything. The integration of AD users in the DLP can also improve as well as taking reports. For instance, if a user wants information on the kind of report in the DLP, I can currently not look at it. I need to get a proper DLP report. Also, if my management is asking a report, I must be able to tell how many users' USB is blocked. Right now I am not able to see what policy I implemented and how many users I have. Those are the basic things that McAfee should improve during the migration process. It should be straightforward.
Sensitive data is constantly at risk of loss, theft, and exposure. Many times, the data simply walks right out the front door on a laptop or USB device. Companies that suffer such a data loss risk serious consequences, including regulatory penalties, public disclosure, brand damage, customer distrust, and financial losses. According to a Ponemon Institute report, 7% of all corporate laptops will be lost or stolen sometime during their useful life. The rapid proliferation of mobile devices...
The price could be improved.
The only thing that I think could be improved is the data classifier. It's not a very robust classifier, which is where its limitation lies. For example, you see a lot of higher-end solutions where people can classify data more effectively, adding labels like transcription labels and such. McAfee’s classifier doesn't handle all those tasks. It doesn’t offer the same level of functionality as other data classification tools. You can't do things like fingerprinting and other advanced classification methods. However, if you were to make it more robust, the product could become too heavy to run effectively on endpoints and servers. So, to be honest, I can't think of anything else off the top of my head that could be added. I think it's a great solution as it stands. If anyone wants extended data classification, they can leverage other tools like Titus, Fortra's Classifier Suite (previously known as Boldon James Classifier), or even Microsoft AIP if they have the budget. You can also leverage Trellix to enhance your data protection. From my point of view, McAfee Complete Data Protection is one of the best solutions out there, if not the best, to be honest.
There are some areas that need improvement. Firstly, the limited coverage of operating systems is a concern, as McAfee Complete Data Protection currently supports only Windows, leaving out Mac and Linux users. Network DLP integration may not be an advantage then. Furthermore, no US security solution is included in the complete data protection. It is available on the CASB front. Additionally, the availability of presentations and sample reports is lacking, making it challenging for presentations and road shows. The absence of roadshows in India from the solution's end is affecting the introduction of new technologies to Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs). The marketing strategies need to change drastically. I had a deal for seven thousand users, and there's a competitor ready to step in. Being a more aggressive partner could help secure deals and upsell other McAfee products to customers.
The product must improve endpoint encryption. Sometimes, it has issues syncing with Active Directory.
The solution's pricing could be better compared to Kaspersky Endpoint Security.
Since most companies are going into the cloud now, McAfee needs to adapt to the cloud solution. Currently, it is on-prem. In short, currently, the DLP solution is on-prem. They need to adapt to the cloud environment. I would like the product to be more scalable in the next release.
We had to migrate and upgrade the DLP, and then customers were experiencing some unknown issues. We had to upgrade the Microsoft package on our system.
The UI could be improved a bit. Other than that, the solution has been very good.
Some clients still receive spam and malware in their attachments, so the data protection isn't working correctly. We have configured it and enabled the features in the client's system, but some policies have failed to work once or twice.
The solution already has a lot of really great features. Nothing is missing. As a new technology, it does need to grow. They need to continue to grow security aspects.
They could be better in terms of Complete Data Protection. There are a lot of components that get involved there. I would like to see a bit more stability. The initial setup process could be simpler.
There are compatibility issues with the Chrome browser. The DLP works absolutely fine with the internet and the Firefox browser, however, it doesn't support Chrome. That's the only drawback of the DLP. Even if there is a new patch released in Chrome, McAfee DLP doesn't support it. There are a lot of incidents that are being captured and there is no option for deleting the older incidents from the console. However, if you want to treat that incident, then I think there is some task that has to be done and it doesn't work in the right way. We had to run some more subscriptions this year to reduce the incidents.
The full set of features are enabled only for Windows. There are some features that do not work with Mac. With respect to device control, it can be quite limited for Mac. With Mac, we experience problems with post-related issues, with the device controller, and with email-related listings. Network communication is another thing. Certain rules just do not work for our Mac environments. The security could also be improved when it comes to Mac. Most of our customers ask for these features. They want these same features for their Mac devices. We're just hosts — it's up to McAfee to provide these features. They should also offer encryption and device control for Linux.
The price is a little high and could be better.
We are looking for more granular control over the policies. McAfee has some challenges in this regard.
In terms of where the solution could improve, it could integrate with network solutions for ADT,email web gateway and discovery.
There is a feature called manual classification that is not intuitive to use and can be improved. There was an option for SQL setup in the older versions of this product and it has been removed, but we would like to see it made available as an add-on.
I think in looking at this as to how it can be improved, the drive encryption side is not as straightforward as it could be. It is a little bit heavy on the configuration part. There are a lot of options to look at. Maybe it is just that the training needs to fine-tuned a little bit or maybe the UI needs to be a little more interactive. There are so many options that you have in the product that you may not know exactly what something does if you enable an option. There is a gray area, for example, as to whether or not it is best practice is to have a pre-boot authentication or not. The usual argument is that if you do not turn on pre-boot authentication, your encryption can actually be bypassed. There is a question and it is not an argument that you can easily answer because the product is not doing enough to help you out. They need a publication that actually sets that record straight, or probably they could have something like a best practice configuration guide so users can take advantage of that for determining exactly what options are best for them. People do not always know what are the best practices for their environment. They try out a lot of stuff, and then if it does not work with their system, they just come to the conclusion that the solution does not work. They blame the product rather than the configuration which they do not have set correctly. So with a best practice configuration guide or something similar, it would help people take proper advantage of the solution and help them to better see the total benefits of what the solution has to offer. So their configuration is complex, but this can have advantages as well if they provided the user with the information they need.
The solution needs more advanced features. Customers tend to not like the navigation that is offered. While accessing the DLP is easy, navigating inside of it is difficult. The policies and propagation need to be improved. The solution should integrate more into the Cloud. McAfee is not focusing too much on the Cloud. They need to do so.
Well expectedly, the upgrade process from Orchestrator v5.32 to 5.91 will be a bit painful for a lengthy and hardly completed client saturation (i.e. ensuing endpoint upgrade, if not done after server & SHA cert update committed, the client(s) will completely fail to work again) for our 1300+ endpoints. These included PCs and offline notebooks, which cannot be easily kept online over an extended period of time waiting for saturation in an undetermined upgrade order. I would like to have an easier and less-hassle upgrade process in future releases of the software, and extra license renewal price discounts too. Procurement/license renewal options should also be devised by McAfee for continually incremental buying by an organization over its lifetime of usage. Additionally, export and re-import of encryption keys in a batch could also be available as an extra orchestrator module for seamless transfer in case of server migration/re-installation. Noticeably, the disk encryption process is far swifter on PCs/notebooks equipped with SSD drives but a speed improvement should better be available in future releases for mechanical disk drives for still being existent in the years to come.
The improvement that I think most needs to be addressed is a claim from many customers that I receive all the time. They say that the product consumes too much RAM and CPU. It makes clones in the machine and that eats up resources. It makes the clone as long as it is running on the machine. The problem is big enough for users that I need to have another smart, reliable solution that can be deployed instead if the customer does not have the hardware to allow the product to consume the needed volume of RAM and CPU. If McAfee were able to do all it does without stealing so much of the resources on a machine, I would not have this problem of having to consider other deployments.
The refresh feature needs improvement. You need to refresh it manually yt going to the address bar, clicking on it and pressing enter, or pressing F5. There should be a button you can click on to refresh or have it so every five seconds it's refreshing. QTs should be drag and drop. The solution should allow for a bit more customization. The reporting is good, but could use improvement. Right now you can export it as a PDF or CSV but these options will not make your design available. They should be more visual.
When it comes to the integration, the information or instruction that comes with the package is not good. When you are getting started it's not easy to integrate it, there are many things involved. If you are a beginner you can easily become confused, but if you have experience then it can be easy. In the next release, I would like to see some additional product features added to the interface. There should be more public awareness or comparisons in the market. People are still questioning why I chose McAfee. I want simplicity. A new user opening the dashboard will be confused. It needs to be more user-friendly.
The solution needs to reduce the number of false positives. There are too many of them. In future releases, McAfee Endpoint Protection needs to also include a module for mobile devices. If they do this, they should ensure the feature caters to both Android and iOS.
I don't like this solution because it is difficult to manage endpoints, policies, algorithm engines, and products. We can't control how it works with Outlook or the browser. You can't control the application over the browser to Google Chrome, Google Drive, or OneDrive. It is difficult to manage. Support needs improvement. They take days to get back to you and are not always able to help. This solution is not stable, other solutions are better. In the next release, I would like to see more work done with the Browsers or to have a cloud control application.
If you compare this solution with next-generation products like CrowdStrike, you will find that it should be easier to work on and therefore more user-friendly. With this solution, data protection is not straightforward. So McAfee should focus more on ease of management and user-friendliness. I would also like to have an option to migrate from the old environment to the new, graphical environment. The interface itself is not easy for administrators because they have to check everything. The integration of AD users in the DLP can also improve as well as taking reports. For instance, if a user wants information on the kind of report in the DLP, I can currently not look at it. I need to get a proper DLP report. Also, if my management is asking a report, I must be able to tell how many users' USB is blocked. Right now I am not able to see what policy I implemented and how many users I have. Those are the basic things that McAfee should improve during the migration process. It should be straightforward.
The price of this solution needs to be improved. This solution does not do as well at protecting the end-user against unknown viruses.
Maybe a better GUI platform; that would make it easier to present information to management, so I would not need to fix the data before I present it.