Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management vs Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention comparison

"The automatic data labeling is compelling, and we are investigating its use."

"Purview's built-in functionality provides immediate access to reports, streamlining the entire process."

"The UI is the most valuable feature."

"I like the sensitivity labels and data security posture management for AI."

"The policy customization feature is very useful, and we have successfully used the auto policy configuration."

"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."

"The solution's IDM (Indexed Document Matching), EDM (Exact Data Matching), and DCM (Described Content Matching) features have been most effective in identifying and mitigating potential data leaks."

"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."

"Insider risk management and data retention are beneficial."

"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."

"If we can prevent information from going out, eventually, when a regulator is asking about our security measures, we can show what we've been doing."

"Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management can be challenging to implement due to its complexity and dense documentation, making it difficult to get started."

"Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management can be challenging to implement due to its complexity and dense documentation, making it difficult to get started."

"Microsoft's Purview Data Lifecycle Management preview features can be unreliable, hindering their usefulness."

"Endpoint Data Loss Prevention needs to be improved as it is not up to expectations."

"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."

"Some main features are limited in comparison to other solutions."

"We faced a performance issue with the tool when we didn't get alerts for file uploads."

"The AI advancements can improve the false positives."

"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."

"It could cover more solutions and technologies."

"They do not provide language options beyond the ones already available, so our language option is missing."

"The service operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, charging an extra one cent per field of metadata scanned in our data."

"If one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the price as one out of ten."

"It is a part of our Microsoft licensing. We pay for a yearly renewal. Its price is reasonable for the size of the organization we are. It is fairly competitive, and you get what you pay for. We have an E5 license, and a part of understanding the E5 license is to see what all you get with it. If you really look at it from that standpoint, you get a lot of value. You have Defender and all its security features in there as well. Their licensing is fairly flexible. They have different programs. We've seen ones where you could pay for up to three to five years in advance. There is also a monthly pay-as-you-go type of deal, but we're doing a yearly renewal and fixing the budget."

"It's a little bit pricey compared to competitors, but it's not too high."

"You get the solution in a bundle if you get the E5 suite."

"We are using the E3 license for Microsoft 365 with the E5 compliance license add-on."

"The cost works out to about $15 per user per month."

"The solution’s pricing is reasonable."

"The pricing is reasonable."