We performed a comparison between GitGuardian Platform and Zscaler DLP 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 breadth of the solution detection capabilities is pretty good. They have good categories and a lot of different types of secrets... it gives us a great range when it comes to types of secrets, and that's good for us."
"GitGuardian Internal Monitoring has helped increase our secrets detection rate by several orders of magnitude. This is a hard metric to get. For example, if we knew what our secrets were and where they were, we wouldn't need GitGuardian or these types of solutions. There could be a million more secrets that GitGuardian doesn't detect, but it is basically impossible to find them by searching for them."
"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."
"GitGuardian has also helped us develop a security-minded culture. We're serious about shift left and getting better about code security. I think a lot of people are getting more mindful about what a secret is."
"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."
"Presently, we find the pre-commit hooks more useful."
"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 UI is easy to use."
"The product’s most valuable features are data discovery, activity control, and zero trust exchange."
"The most valuable aspect of Zscaler Cloud DLP is its automatic DLP feature."
"It's one of the easier products on the market as far as set-ups and deployments. Even across their whole product suite, they've made it pretty simple."
"The solution is the best for storage."
"As a cloud-based service, it is very easily implemented."
"The product’s most valuable features are inbound and outbound scanning and API control."
"You can close your data protection gaps with Zscaler. You can quickly find all the classified, sensitive data across the cloud."
"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."
"GitGuardian's hook and dashboard scanners are the two entities. They should work together as one. We've seen several discrepancies where the hook is not being flagged on the dashboard. I still think they need to do some fine-tuning around that. We don't want to waste time."
"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."
"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."
"They could give a developer access to a dashboard for their team's repositories that just shows their repository secrets. I think more could be exposed to developers."
"GitGuardian could have more detailed information on what software engineers can do. It only provides some highly generic feedback when a secret is detected. They should have outside documentation. We send this to our software engineers, who are still doing the commits. It's the wrong way to work, but they are accustomed to doing it this way. When they go into that ticket, they see a few instructions that might be confusing. If I see a leaked secret committed two years ago, it's not enough to undo that commit. I need to go in there, change all my code to utilize GitHub secrets, and go on AWS to validate my key."
"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."
"I would like to see more fine-grained access controls when tickets are assigned for incidents. I would like the ability to provide more controls to the team leads or the product managers so that they can drive what we, the AppSec team, are doing."
"Price-wise, it is a costly product and it should be reduced."
"There could be additional ways to define proximity. Additionally, they should provide some exclusion options for specific policies and an ability to control the DLP engine."
"In the next release, I would like to see RE2 Regex supported."
"On the improvement side, when we bypass certain internet traffic types, it's currently recommended to have a one-click option, but audio and video aren't always supported. Thus, we need to bypass that kind of traffic. So, it is an area of improvement."
"The product must allow users to check logs for an entire year in the local console."
"Another area of improvement is implementation through non-client connectors. The solution can be implemented in two ways. One uses the back file; the other one uses client connectors. So the client connector is pretty fast, but when it comes to non-client connectors and procedures, it's kind of delayed and slow."
"We have issues with the tool's maintenance and networking. It should be able to work in offline mode as well."
"The only issue with Zscaler Cloud DLP is that it only gives you DLP protection from web traffic, which is flowing out, while a full-blown DLP solution such as Forcepoint or Symantec gives you DLP coverage for multiple channels. Zscaler Cloud DLP doesn't give you coverage for email, fax, and USB channels, and this is the only challenge or room for improvement in the solution. It's just an extension on top of what you're buying on the proxy, so it's just an added layer, and it doesn't cover DLP on a very broad level. I'm unsure if Zcaler is in the business of competing with a full-blown DLP solution, and if there's a plan to expand the features of Zscaler Cloud DLP beyond the web channel because you'll have to deploy a full-blown agent for it. I'm unsure if this is on the cards because the solution is just an added layer that you get with your proxy. I've asked the Zcaler team whether there's a plan to go full DLP in the future, but I didn't get a positive response. There isn't any feature I'd like added to Zscaler Cloud DLP currently, because anything you could think of that should be in cloud or SaaS solutions is already there, except for machine learning, as it's the only functionality that seems to be lacking in the solution. Machine learning is an additional policy available in other DLP solutions in the market, but my team didn't find it in Zscaler Cloud DLP."
GitGuardian Platform is ranked 6th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 21 reviews while Zscaler DLP is ranked 4th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 15 reviews. GitGuardian Platform is rated 9.0, while Zscaler DLP is rated 8.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler DLP writes "Provides a range of security measures to protect network traffic". GitGuardian Platform is most compared with SonarQube, Cycode, GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk and Veracode, whereas Zscaler DLP is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Varonis Platform. See our GitGuardian Platform vs. Zscaler DLP 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.
