We compared Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention offers robust data protection capabilities, seamless integration, and reliable incident response mechanisms. Users appreciate its prevention of data leakage and policy enforcement. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention focuses on safeguarding sensitive data, offering comprehensive visibility, and efficient breach detection. Users praise its affordability, ease of use, and seamless integration with Microsoft tools. Both products have strong customer service, but Forcepoint users desire a better interface and reporting, while Purview users seek more accurate breach prevention and customizable policy options.
Features: The valuable features of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention include robust data protection capabilities, comprehensive policy enforcement, and reliable incident response mechanisms. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention highlights safeguarding sensitive data, comprehensive visibility and control over data, and efficient detection of potential data breaches.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is described as minimal, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is praised for its affordability. Users find the licensing process for Forcepoint straightforward, while Microsoft Purview offers flexible and accommodating licensing options., Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention has received highly beneficial user reviews, emphasizing its efficient data protection capabilities, prevention of information loss and leakage, improved productivity, enhanced security, and cost savings. In comparison, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention received notably positive feedback, highlighting its effectiveness in preventing data loss, reliable data protection features, seamless integration with existing systems, and tangible benefits in terms of enhanced data security and protection.
Room for Improvement: Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention has been criticized for its user interface, reporting capabilities, documentation, technical support, and customization options. In comparison, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention requires enhancements in accuracy, policy options, user interface, and integration with other Microsoft applications.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews show that the implementation time for Forcepoint DLP ranges from one week to three months, while the implementation time for Microsoft Purview DLP varies from one week to three months. The reviews suggest that the time frames mentioned should be taken into consideration, as they might refer to separate phases or the same period., The customer service for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention received positive feedback for their helpful and knowledgeable support team. Microsoft Purview's customer service is highly regarded for its promptness, efficiency, and reliability of assistance.
The summary above is based on 41 interviews we conducted recently with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Forcepoint has been the leader in the space for many years and they, are very well established, and mature."
"The solution’s content classification is the best."
"The Forcepoint tool is well developed. It is ranked in many evaluations at the top when it comes to enterprise DLP solutions. It has good artificial intelligence that enables our customers to focus on specific incidents, instead of having a complicated list of uncategorized incidents."
"We don't require a lot of downtime, but when we do then we are getting proper support with no issue."
"The integration is great."
"We like the ability to customize our requirements and rules, as well as its ease of use and management. It also has a cloud feature and proxy functionality."
"Some good features are basically its UAV Analytics engine. And even fingerprinting is really good in Forcepoint."
"Forcepoint offers many policies that conform to global DLP best practices, including requirements specific to regions like the Middle East, Europe, etc. They have a policy database in their product. That feature is unique to Forcepoint. Their AI and fingerprinting are incredibly effective and robust. We have tested it multiple times. It always catches the correct data being leaked."
"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."
"For Purview's natively integrated compliance across Azure, Dynamics 365, and Office 365, I would give it a 10 out of 10. It provides all the insights and information."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"The product is easy to configure."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"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."
"The auto-labeling feature is definitely the most valuable feature. It goes in and labels the documents for you in different repositories. It covers the Outlook and Exchange repositories along with SharePoint and OneDrive. It is really helpful in those areas."
"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."
"The reporting features, the real-time reporting, can be improved in Forcepoint. On the dashboard, we don't have a feature that shows real-time incidents. We have to schedule a report in the environment."
"The solution's interface is still not user-friendly for some customers. So, its interface can be better."
"Their discovery or the way they discover the data at risk can also be improved. There are many database servers that are not supported by Forcepoint."
"It would be better if we could easily integrate with other products. Suppose I want to integrate this DLP with some other CASB solutions or a firewall solution. In that case, it takes a considerable amount of time because Forcepoint DLP doesn't come with a legacy firewall or CASB solutions to integrate with it. We need to do it separately. It's not improvised for different sectors, and I need to look for other solutions. I'm investing a lot of time researching and implementing other solutions for other areas. That is one point where I can't feel satisfied with this Forcepoint DLP. The only problem we have faced is that it consumes most of the CPU whenever a Forcepoint DLP is deployed on an endpoint. This is when users feel some lag in their machine's performance or their Internet performance. That's when we uninstall and try to reinstall, or we'll give a cloud link to which it gets access. We use Forcepoint DLP for endpoint protection, not for email or cloud. For email and drive, we went with the Google DLP. Forcepoint DLP isn't as efficient on drive or chat, or email. For that, we have some specialized solutions, but it would be better to have a single console where you can control all these areas. It would be pretty easy for a consumer who is going to use this product. All in one shot, you can try to track it and enforce your policies on a single dashboard. That is one point currently lacking in Forcepoint, and I feel they need to work on it. In the next release, I would like to use this DLP across different solutions like network, firewall, email, or chat with a consolidated dashboard and with integration facilities with other solutions. Security should work as a whole. It shouldn't work individually in blocks. It does not serve our purpose. It should be integrated with multiple solutions. For that, it should have enough intelligence to work with other tools. I'm looking forward to seeing that kind of capability with Forcepoint."
"An area for improvement in Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is the complex UI and policy deployment. You have to find the policies, and then designing the policies is also tricky."
"I'd like the data classification to be better."
"We want to be able to do data classification better in the product and reduce false positives, especially on data loss prevention."
"The support could improve Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention."
"Technical support is awful."
"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."
"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."
"They do not provide language options beyond the ones already available, so our language option is missing."
"There is no AIP for Linux systems. That's a setback. Another thing it's lacking is libraries to work with Python. It has libraries for C# and C++, for example, but not for Python and, these days, Python is very useful."
"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."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement."
More Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is ranked 2nd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 51 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 1st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 13 reviews. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention writes "DLP great for encryptions; tech support is quite helpful". 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". Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Digital Guardian, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector, Zscaler DLP and GTB Technologies Inspector, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Intune, Amazon Macie, Zscaler DLP and Digital Guardian. See our Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention 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.
