We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Microsoft BitLocker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Encryption solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"It has been scalable."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"The most valuable feature is the simplicity and integration with the Microsoft Clouds platform."
"The most valuable feature is the TPM (Trusted Platform Module), which makes the PC security stronger because somebody who is not from the team cannot access the PC without the decryption PIN."
"Technical support is excellent."
"While it helps mitigate unauthorized data access by enhancing file and system protection through encryption, the tool is really enhanced with the combination of other Microsoft Security and Compliance features like data labeling."
"There's a lot of manageability within the solution. This is very helpful."
"It is an encryption tool and provides security."
"The solution has a feature that automatically asks the users to upgrade their password once we set up the process."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"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."
"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."
"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 pricing should be improved."
"Some of the technical internal functions, such as encryption protocols or something similar, could be improved."
"If the encryption was faster then it would make the experience more pleasant."
"They could improve cloud integration regarding attribute and encryption key management."
"The deployment process regarding prerequisites and automation could be easy to understand."
"They can improve the security of the application and include an encryption disk in the next feature."
"The customizations could be more flexible."
"The console GUI could be better."
Digital Guardian is ranked 8th in Endpoint Encryption with 11 reviews while Microsoft BitLocker is ranked 1st in Endpoint Encryption with 58 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Microsoft BitLocker is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Highly customizable, helpful support, and multiple modules available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft BitLocker writes "User-friendly, easy to set up, and offers real-time machine status updates". 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 Microsoft BitLocker is most compared with ESET Endpoint Encryption, McAfee Complete Data Protection, Symantec Endpoint Encryption, Trend Micro Endpoint Encryption and WinMagic SecureDoc. See our Digital Guardian vs. Microsoft BitLocker report.
See our list of best Endpoint Encryption vendors and best Mobile Data Protection vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Encryption 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.