We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and GitGuardian Platform 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."The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"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."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"You can also assign tasks to specific teams or people to complete, such as assigning something to the "blue team" or saying that this person needs to do this, and that person needs to do that. That is a great feature because you can actually manage your team internally in GitGuardian."
"Some of our teams have hundreds of repositories, so filtering by team saves a lot of time and effort."
"I like GitGuardian's instant response. When you have an incident, it's reported immediately. The interface gives you a great overview of your current leaked secrets."
"It enables us to identify leaks that happened in the past and remediate current leaks as they happen in near real-time. When I say "near real-time," I mean within minutes. These are industry-leading remediation timelines for credential leaks. Previously, it might have taken companies years to get credentials detected or remediated. We can do it in minutes."
"When they give you a description of what happened, it's really easy to follow and to retest. And the ability to retest is something that you don't have in other solutions. If a secret was detected, you can retest if it is still there. It will show you if it is in the history."
"The secrets detection and alerting is the most important feature. We get alerted almost immediately after someone commits a secret. It has been very accurate, allowing us to jump on it right away, then figure out if we have something substantial that has been leaked or whether it is something that we don't have to worry about. This general main feature of the app is great."
"What is particularly helpful is that having GitGuardian show that the code failed a check enables us to automatically pass the resolution to the author. We don't have to rely on the reviewer to assign it back to him or her. Letting the authors solve their own problems before they get to the reviewer has significantly improved visibility and reduced the remediation time from multiple days to minutes or hours. Given how time-consuming code reviews can be, it saves some of our more scarce resources."
"GitGuardian has many features that fit our use cases. We have our internal policies on secret exposure, and our code is hosted on GitLab, so we need to prevent secrets from reaching GitLab because our customers worry that GitLab is exposed. One of the great features is the pre-receive hook. It prevents commits from being pushed to the repository by activating the hook on the remotes, which stops the developers from pushing to the remote. The secrets don't reach GitLab, and it isn't exposed."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"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."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"Technical support could be better."
"If the client uses Windows 10 or 11 and Microsoft updates the operating system's version, Digital Guardian must update their product to match compatibility."
"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."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in GitGuardian on Azure DevOps. The implementation is a bit hard there. This is one of the things we requested help with. I would not say their support is not good, but they need them to improve in helping customers on that side."
"The purchasing process is convoluted compared to Snyk, the other tool we use. It's like night and day because you only need to punch in your credit card, and you're set. With GitGuardian, getting a quote took two or three weeks. We paid for it in December but have not settled that payment yet."
"For some repositories, there are a lot of incidents. For example, one repository says 255 occurrences, so I assume these are 255 alerts and nobody is doing anything about them. These could be false positives. However, I cannot assess it correctly, because I haven't been closing these false positives myself. From the dashboard, I can see that for some of the repositories, there have been a lot of closing of these occurrences, so I would assume there are a lot of false positives. A ballpark estimate would be 60% being false positives. One of the arguments from the developers against this tool is the number of false positives."
"The main thing for me is the customization for some of the healthcare-specific identifiers that we want to validate. There should be some ability, which is coming in the near future, to have custom identifiers. Being in healthcare, we have pretty specific patterns that we need to match for PHI or PII. Having that would add a little bit extra to it."
"We have been somewhat confused by the dashboard at times."
"There are some features that are lacking in GitGuardian. The more we grow and the more engineers we have, the more it will become difficult to assign an incident because the assignment is not automatic. I know they are working on that and we are waiting for it."
"An area for improvement is the front end for incidents. The user experience in this area could be much better."
"One improvement that I'd like to see is a cleaner for Splunk logs. It would be nice to have a middle man for anything we send or receive from Splunk forwarders. I'd love to see it get cleaned by GitGuardian or caught to make sure we don't have any secrets getting committed to Splunk logs."
Digital Guardian is ranked 10th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews while GitGuardian Platform is ranked 6th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 21 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while GitGuardian Platform is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitGuardian Platform writes "It dramatically improved our ability to detect secrets, saved us time, and reduced our mean time to remediation". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas GitGuardian Platform is most compared with SonarQube, Cycode, GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk and Veracode. See our Digital Guardian vs. GitGuardian Platform 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.
