We compared Endpoint Protector and Symantec Data Loss Prevention based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The pricing of these two solutions is comparable. However, Endpoint Protector comes out on top in this comparison due to the complexity of Symantec’s deployment process, its possibly ineffective support, and lack of ROI data.
"Its robust security audit and compliance functionalities prove especially beneficial for businesses in sectors like BFSI (Banking, Financial Services, and Insurance) and Information Technology."
"The core of its value lies in obtaining logs remotely and exercising control over what employees can or cannot use."
"The search for keywords is very important in our security operations because one of the key use cases we had was for the ability to search keyword-based on an internal database of keywords that have been submitted by other project managers within the company that's around intellectual property. The ability to search on keywords was part of that."
"The product is forward-looking, in my opinion, which is a requirement nowadays."
"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."
"The console is friendly and it supports Mac."
"The versatility regarding the exit point Endpoint Protector supports in making sure that important data doesn't leave our organization is vital for us. In the industry that we're in, data breaches are a significant concern. While our staff is contractually required to maintain confidentiality and they're all very aware that they shouldn't try and transfer company data of different classifications elsewhere to non-company devices, there's a risk."
"The most valuable feature is device control."
"With respect to the amount of intelligence that they have with respect to how they formed the DLP solution, for example, exact data matching. If you compare Forcepoint with Symantec, Symantec is more sophisticated than Forcepoint."
"Symantec DLP has many servers, and the solution is very powerful because you can use it in ports, endpoints, networks, and email servers to prevent the leakage of emails. DLP can be integrated with Symantec encryption."
"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."
"The solution offers great reporting."
"It has good options for policy findings. You can do granular policy enhancements with multiple options. And the SMB blocking is a very good feature."
"There's only one policy needed to implement for all channels."
"What we like about Symantec Data Loss Prevention is that it's a very good product. We never faced any problems with its performance. It has very good performance. There was this RAM issue, but it was an internal issue which we've sorted out. Apart from the RAM issue, there are no other issues with Symantec Data Loss Prevention."
"The detection capabilities are comprehensive."
"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."
"There are times when the server needs to be updated, and it would help if I got a notification for when the newest version comes out, because at the moment, I'm going in every now and then and checking. Sometimes it comes out and I didn't know it had come out."
"In Linux a user can remove a getent anytime. There is no control there on the file structure in Linux. So if this solution could give us information on what users removed in the dashboard, it would help us."
"The policy engine could use a bit of work. They're definitely going in the right direction. We've been working with them over the last few weeks to try and optimize that. But it's reasonably clear that they're just not putting as much effort into the policy engine as into other things, like content discovery."
"When you want to uninstall and reinstall, there are a lot of issues. You have to do a lot of workarounds to reinstall Endpoint Protector. This is a major issue that we have constantly because we still have old systems with XP. While there are only very few, we need to run them because there are machines attached that only run on XP. When we need to uninstall and reinstall on XP or Windows 10, we have serious issues left in the Registry Editor everywhere. There is a lot of manual interference to get the reinstallation to work. For the uninstallation of Endpoint Protector, they need to work on this so it doesn't leave any leftovers behind."
"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."
"Customization could be a lot better."
"It would be helpful to implement filtering mechanisms so that we can sort and view the data based on software and vendor, providing more clarity and ease in analysis."
"In the object capture recognition, which we implemented recently, there are a lot of false positives that have been happening."
"I would like to see changes to the analytics."
"We need to have agent auto-parsing."
"There are some features that are not available which are required by every data loss prevention solution."
"Where things could be improved is that product engineering takes time to respond when we make a request. They get on a call for troubleshooting, but fixing the issue takes time."
"The solution could offer improved more informative documentation."
"The product's technical support services need improvement."
"The Symantec DLP solution is very complex, and installation requires many components."
More Symantec Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
CoSoSys Endpoint Protector is ranked 8th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 25 reviews while Symantec Data Loss Prevention is ranked 3rd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 52 reviews. CoSoSys Endpoint Protector is rated 8.4, while Symantec Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. 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 Symantec Data Loss Prevention writes "Consitent, accurate, and simple". CoSoSys Endpoint Protector is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Safetica ONE, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Zscaler DLP and GTB Technologies Inspector, whereas Symantec Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian, Zscaler DLP and Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention. See our CoSoSys Endpoint Protector vs. Symantec 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.
