We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Identity and Microsoft Purview Data Governance based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This solution has advanced a lot over the last few years."
"The basic security monitoring at its core feature is the most valuable aspect. But also the investigative parts, the historical logging of events over the network are extremely interesting because it gives an in-depth insight into the history of account activity that is really easy to read, easy to follow, and easy to export."
"The feature I like most is that you can create your own customized detection rules. It has a lot of default alerts and rules, but you can customize them according to your business needs."
"The best feature is security monitoring, which detects and investigates suspicious user activities. It can easily detect advanced attacks based on the behavior. The credentials are securely stored, so it reduces the risk of compromise. It will monitor user behavior based on artificial intelligence to protect the identities in your organization. It will even help secure the on-premise Active Directory. It syncs from the cloud to on-premise, and on-premise modifications will be reflected in the cloud."
"Defender for Identity has not affected the end-user experience."
"It is easy to set up. Based on the number of devices you would like to set up, you can use scripts, Group Policy, etc. It takes five minutes to set up."
"The most valuable aspect is its connection to Microsoft Sentinel and Defender for Endpoint, and giving exact timelines for incidents and when certain events occured during an incident."
"The solution offers excellent visibility into threats."
"I use the tool in projects as a medium to provide information as reports to the stakeholders."
"Purview helped us automate and control our data without having to rely on people to manually tag documents with specific retention periods."
"The most significant value lies in its seamless integration into the Azure ecosystem, automating various processes and reducing operational burdens."
"We can prevent, block, or audit however we like."
"The product has helped us save both time and money."
"The documentation is very exhaustive. Anyone can go ahead and try different use cases."
"One of the best features is the classification rules, especially the scan rule sets. They are really useful, especially when we need to understand the current data the company has to ensure that all the problematic data can be put under someone's responsibility."
"The custom classifications are one of the most valuable features."
"One potential area for improvement could be exploring flexibility in the installation of Microsoft Defender for Identity agents."
"There is no option to remedy an issue directly from the console. If we see an alert, we can't fix it from the console. Instead, we must depend on other Microsoft products, such as MDE. That is a significant drawback. It simply works as a scanner, which can sometimes put enough load on the sensors. Immediate actions should be possible from the dashboard because. It can prevent issues from spreading further."
"The technical support needs significant improvement. Documentation for more minor issues in the form of guides or walkthroughs could help to resolve this issue. The number of tickets raised would decrease, removing some pressure from the support team and making it easier to clear the remaining tickets."
"The impact of the sensors on the domain controllers can be quite high depending on your loads. I don't know if there's any room for improvement there, but that's one of the things that might be improved."
"Defender for Identity gives us visibility, but we often get false positives from Azure that take us down the garden path. We go through 30 incidents each day and most of those are false positives or benign positive alerts. Occasionally, we get true positive alerts."
"Microsoft should look at what competing vendors like CrowdStrike and Broadcom are doing and incorporate those features into Sentinel and Defender. At the same time, I think the intelligence inside the product is improving fast. They should incorporate more zero-trust and hybrid trust approaches. They need to build up threat intelligence based on threats and methods used in attacks on other companies."
"When the data leaves the cloud, there are security issues."
"The solution could be better at using group-managed access and they could replace it with broad-based access controls."
"I have some concerns about the separation of roles in Purview from the Microsoft tenant, as well as how they interact with the security portal and endpoint manager."
"I'd like to see them improve the training for implementing this type of solution."
"We've had a few issues with the scanner. It runs perfectly one day, and on another day, it will run the whole night. It's probably related to the rules. If I set some compliance rules and apply the rules to any column, I can't delete it. I have to disable it and reactivate it."
"Purview's data loss prevention for macOS endpoints has some limitations, and the end-user experience of recovering from a failure is lacking."
"The custom data classification for the African region needs to be improved."
"The current event-based retention management is very poor."
"We have had a lot of issues since we moved to Unified Support. There have been work gaps there, and we believe they fixed them, but we need to make sure that they are going to be sustainable. It is to be seen."
"Running eDiscovery once a day takes quite a long time because it has to fetch your data. I also want the eDiscovery results to be improved. At the same time, I would like to get a centralized page where I could see records management applied to my Office 365 tenant visualized instead of waiting for a custom script to run through the complete tenant."
More Microsoft Defender for Identity Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Governance Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Identity is ranked 8th in Microsoft Security Suite with 13 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Governance is ranked 7th in Microsoft Security Suite with 48 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Identity is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Purview Data Governance is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Identity writes "Offers robust protection from insider threats, but the customer support is poor". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Purview Data Governance writes "User friendly with good documentation but needs to cover more non-Microsoft use cases". Microsoft Defender for Identity is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID Protection, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Microsoft Entra Verified ID, Splunk User Behavior Analytics and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Governance is most compared with Collibra Governance, Alation Data Catalog, Varonis Platform, Informatica Axon and Microsoft Intune. See our Microsoft Defender for Identity vs. Microsoft Purview Data Governance report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.
