We performed a comparison between CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Digital Guardian 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."Endpoint Protector's best features are its protection and user-friendliness."
"It is fantastic in terms of the granularity of the policies. It has many built-in policies, and we can add or create more policies as well. It is perfect, and it gives us more options. We have some users who go outside and then come inside. With EPP, we can even control those users who are outside. If they need to access the media that we are using right now, we can provide OTP messages so that they can access the media even when they are outside of their organization. With our previous solution, we were facing some issues in doing this."
"We like that content-aware and device controls can easily be managed. They're not complicated. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand them."
"I like the data protection feature. Our users were working on a client's CRM application with a lot of client-related EIA information. We did not want the users to be able to send any of this data outside. I also like its ability to protect against data leaks via emails and social media. I like that you can deploy it quickly, and it requires no training."
"The device control is a big deal for us because we can actually lock out removable drives and different types of hardware. It allows us to have better control over what end-users plug into their computers, and we can have deny lists and tighten our security posture."
"It has been scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"The reports and analysis could be improved. There could be a little more data, and the logs could be a little more granular, but it's nothing major. It does what it needs to do, and it's fine."
"Endpoint Protector would be improved with more DLP templates."
"Because it is only an Endpoint Protector at this point in time, it does not have a network DLP component. There's only an endpoint DLP component. In the future, it would be good if a network DLP component could be embedded and extended to have network DLP capabilities."
"We are using it to only apply media restrictions. When we are installing a new agent, we have to install EPP manually on a device. It would be great if the installations can be done from the server instead of me going to each PC or device to implement EPP or using a policy. They should have some sort of system so that a domain admin can install EPP on all PCs from a central manager."
"It would be better if they had an inbound restriction feature. For example, I work out of my home from my personal computer. All my policies can be deployed while working. When I am done, I should be able to use my machine as my personal machine, and all these policies should be waived. In the next release, I want time bound restriction of the policies because most of these users were working out of home and using their personal computers."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"Technical support could be better."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
CoSoSys Endpoint Protector is ranked 4th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 5 reviews while Digital Guardian is ranked 6th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 7 reviews. CoSoSys Endpoint Protector is rated 8.8, while Digital Guardian is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of CoSoSys Endpoint Protector writes "Makes management and upgrades easier and provides better control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Highly customizable, helpful support, and multiple modules available". CoSoSys Endpoint Protector is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Zscaler Cloud DLP and GTB Technologies Inspector, whereas Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention and Code42 Incydr. See our CoSoSys Endpoint Protector vs. Digital Guardian 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.
