Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs Zscaler DLP comparison

"The most valuable features are identifying sensitive data and issuing alerts."

"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."

"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."

"The product is easy to configure."

"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."

"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."

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

"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 product’s most valuable features are data discovery, activity control, and zero trust exchange."

"As a cloud-based service, it is very easily implemented."

"The solution is the best for storage."

"The initial setup is easy."

"On DLP terms, Zscaler Cloud DLP ensures that data doesn't go outside of the organization. So on the network level, Zscaler does a pretty good job."

"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 customer service and support are very good."

"The support is poor."

"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."

"It could cover more solutions and technologies."

"There is a lot of ambiguity when you are setting up labels, such as sensitive information labels. It is a little daunting at first if you don't have prior knowledge, and there is a little bit of a learning curve for setting up the labels. Some of the setup wizards could be more helpful from an AI perspective. They can streamline the setup through more AI technologies so that you don't have to jump through so many hoops and different menus and dropdowns. It would be useful to have a setup wizard that is more hands-off and engaging for setting up the information type labels. If you tell them this is what we're trying to protect, it should basically start to lead you down that path of best practices. Such a feature would be great."

"The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement."

"The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options."

"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"In the next release, I would like to see RE2 Regex supported."

"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."

"The customers would benefit from more robust documentation and conversations around configurations, as it is slightly complex."

"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."

"You won't find anything that can help you with the configuration part and other areas related to the product if you search for proper or exact details of Zscaler Cloud DLP online in very easy language."

"We have issues with the tool's maintenance and networking. It should be able to work in offline mode as well."

"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is part of a bundle and is not sold as a standalone product."

"The product has the best price-to-performance ratio."

"The pricing is reasonable."

"I am satisfied with the tool's pricing."

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

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

"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 an affordable solution"

"The product is a bit expensive."

"The product is a little more expensive than other tools."

"It is an auto-renewal subscription service."

"The licensing model for Zscaler Cloud DLP allows you to only buy what you need. You don't need to buy it as a whole, so it's good."

"Zscaler Cloud DLP is moderately priced. We pay around 2 million rupees per year."

"It's expensive currently. But when purchasing for a large number of users, there's room to negotiate. It's really up to the procurement team."

"Zscaler DLP solution is expensive, with a fixed pricing structure that is billed annually and monthly. There are no additional costs for licenses."