We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Code Security and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its fastest and most outstanding characteristic is ensuring a development line that will not lead to applying applications or code development."
"Check Point CloudGuard Code Security helps to improve the code security of our company, generating rapid and complete assessments to be able to make decisions for improvements."
"You can maintain a legal framework structure at all times."
"Compared to what we used before, it's helping us to be more efficient in managing our traffic."
"Automation has helped a lot to identify and automatically execute policies, rules, and blocks due to its machine learning."
"We have a strong sense of security assurance when utilizing CloudGuard, as it consistently delivers outstanding protection capabilities."
"We have had a number of real events where developers accidentally made commits of API keys, and we were able to detect and begin response actions in minutes. We had the API key revoked in less than five minutes in such events."
"The data center security system has provided real-time analytics on performance and data configuration processes."
"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."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"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."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"The most valuable features are identifying sensitive data and issuing alerts."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."
"The product has improved compliance and confidence. We are aware of the data that is leaving our organization. It provides confidence in data management and information storage."
"I would like this solution to be extended to cellular devices or tablets."
"It is generally difficult to find documentation about the product, and there is relatively little to find."
"They could include web functionalities such as sandboxing."
"This is a highly technical solution for users who do not have security experience. It requires specialized knowledge of configurations to use it correctly."
"There are a lot of opportunities for how they can use their technology to do more. That would be more like sensitive data discovery and other things besides Git Repos, but then you are expanding the scope of what necessarily their product is."
"The ease of use could be better."
"We need to have many of the baselines or development guides providing less complex writing or development."
"The costs are not transparent."
"The AI advancements can improve the false positives."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement."
"A site can have different containers where you store data. We have always wanted to apply compliance, labels, and policies at the container level, rather than to an outer shell or at the site level. That is something we have been looking forward to and I believe Microsoft is already planning something like that."
"The solution should provide better integration with other systems."
"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."
"The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options."
"Technical support is awful."
More Check Point CloudGuard Code Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is ranked 11th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Code Security writes "Good security and functionality with helpful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention writes "Automation has given us consistent analytics and improved quality of insights into user activity". Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is most compared with Snyk, Aqua Cloud Security Platform and Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Intune, Amazon Macie and Zscaler DLP. See our Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs. Microsoft Purview 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.
