Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Reviews

I had different use cases with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention. One of my customers was already working with McAfee DLP, and they migrated from McAfee DLP to Microsoft DLP. I had to do the entire migration and ensure it was working as they expected. They had selected the tool, but I had to ensure it was implemented throughout and tested. It was live in the environment as well.

In this case, I implemented Microsoft DLP for four Microsoft services, including OneDrive, Teams, SharePoint, and Exchange email. An endpoint DLP was implemented for the endpoints.

The solution's most valuable feature is the mature O365 DLP, which works with SharePoint and Teams. It works fine, but we have to make sure that we are doing it right.

My main concern was more about the endpoint side because you should have many different functionalities on the endpoint. Endpoints are not just about the USB or the network share. They deal with many things, and we should be able to understand them.

We should have different settings available on the endpoints about what should be allowed, what should not be allowed, off the network, on the network, etc. The endpoint needs some improvement.

A major improvement is required in the solution's incident handling and alerting. It is a mess, and it cannot handle anything. I don't know what Microsoft is doing. It is really sad. It is a very good endpoint product but does not work as expected.

If an email is detected, I have email evidence because it is going through the exchange. I can download the image, and the operations team can look into the kind of email sent and so on. The evidence is there for forensic purposes.

Microsoft has given functionality for endpoints where anything violating the content on the endpoint should be uploaded to some storage location in Azure Cloud for evidence purposes, which does not work at all. Microsoft has provided it, but their technical team does not know how these things work, which is really sad.

The solution's incident handling is pathetic. They have the compliance portal and security portal. You get alerts on both the compliance portal and the security portal. Having two different alerts on the security and compliance portals does not make sense.

Incidents are not categorized properly. All the incidents are put together, which is really sad. It's not about detecting the data; it's more about handling it once it is detected. I know the data has been detected, but it is useless if I cannot figure it out or work on the incidents. The tool does not make sense to me.

You would face some difficulties on the endpoint side. It is really difficult when you're working on the endpoints. Microsoft is not clear on how they want to portray this product.

For the past four years, I've worked on and off with different tools, including Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention. I have at least three years of experience with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

The solution’s technical support is pathetic.

You cannot compare Microsoft with other DLP products because they are very mature products. Microsoft is not a mature product. It gives you the functionalities, and organizations buy it because they need not spend elsewhere for these options.

People should think a lot before choosing Microsoft Endpoint products. Data security is very important, and we cannot just choose a solution because you're getting it for free.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a seven out of ten.

You get the solution in a bundle if you get the E5 suite. Some additional charges are there for your endpoint DLP because that comes with your endpoint management.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

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. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention ensures users don't accidentally send inappropriate information outside. 

The AI advancements can improve the false positives. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

We use Premier support. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's deployment concepts are straightforward. Documentation is also available. 

I am satisfied with the tool's pricing. 

We consider user parity and user experience across all devices. 

My company is in the SMB domain, so we do not require multi-cloud features. 

Our primary concern is North American regulations, but the tool's compliance with international regulations like GDPR is also helpful. 

I rate it a seven out of ten. 

We use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to prevent data loss on our devices.

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

The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement. For instance, we encountered an email in our environment that needed to be deleted from all user mailboxes. This process required us to involve multiple security administrators. It would have been easier if we could highlight the email after completing the email trace and have the option to add or soft delete it, rather than having to go to the Action Center.

I have been using Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for one year.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is stable and meets Microsoft’s SLA.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention can scale effectively as long as there is space available for additional licenses.

I give Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention a seven out of ten.

We currently have 160 users.

I recommend Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

With this product, you can protect your data from getting out of the company, or falling in the wrong hands. You protect your data leakages. It's a very huge subject. It's very important.

The main part I like about it is, that quite a few of the DLP features are built into the latest server operating systems. The reliability of these is good and there's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems. They work well. 

The setup is straightforward. 

VM people say you cannot use just one product; you need multiple products across the network and you have to deploy to the backups.

The DLP could always be better.

Overall, they should make their Hyper-V and the clustering more stable. VMware offers very good clustering, for example. Microsoft needs to improve a lot in terms of stability.

Technical support is awful.

I've used the solution for almost 10 years.

The solution is very stable and extremely reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution has been very scalable. 

As an integrator, we don't have a single client. We have so many clients. The average number of users can be as low as 100 and can go as higher 1,000. It varies. Not everyone implements DLP. A basic level of DLP is implemented, however, it is a very niche implementation and DLP is done only if someone has to be compliant. For example, a company might need either an SSA 2018 certification or SOC 1 Type 2 certifications. 

You can troubleshoot easily via documentation, which is readily available. 

Technical support seriously needs work. They are not helpful at all.

Microsoft has kind of become a monopoly now and there are so many users. They are more interested in selling the products. They're not interested in supporting them. Unlike the other companies who have at least a ticket system, here, when you are a monopolistic company, you don't care. You know the products will sell, and people will buy them.

Negative

You have the full encryption file and folder, however, for that, we use a different product. We don't use Microsoft. BitLocker has given us encryption features, however, we don't use that. Mostly, we prefer McAfee for that.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. I see a lot of improvement on the installation part when compared to earlier days when it was a little bit tough. Right now, the documentation is good and implementation is not taking that much time. You're up and running quickly. The final aspects might require additional time, however, 80% of it you finish pretty fast. 20% of the time is when you want to fine-tune, depending on your site requirements There it might require an extra effort.

There are some products that are available on a subscription basis. Predominantly, what I use is the one that comes with the operating system and I use other third-party products basically to cover anything that's missing.

We are an integrator as well for Microsoft DLP.

Our deployments are mostly on-premise or private cloud, not on the public cloud.

Overall, I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We basically use it to track personal identifiable information. We are also using it to label any confidential, company trade secret, and internal data. We have an internal use policy and a confidential use policy to encrypt the documents.

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.

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.

It is absolutely stable. A part of the success criteria was to not have any stability issues. It seems very responsive after you get through the deployment aspect of it.

We have been adding more label information types, and it seems to scale well. I don't see any issues there. This part of the solution is built into the Microsoft Cloud ecosystem. Therefore, you don't really have any sort of quota or cap on your data. It seems to be going really well on that front.

Currently, we have about 600 users. We're going to continue on this Microsoft journey. There is another feature that we're looking at called the Purview feature, which is basically adding the same sensitive info type tagging for data in your Microsoft SQL databases. We are currently looking at using that.

Their technical support is excellent. We've had some hiccups here and there regarding the setup. We contacted Microsoft, and they were very quick to respond with solutions. The online Microsoft documentation is also kept fairly up to date, which has been another plus. Its documentation is really well done.

It was fairly complex because it has a very wide and broad gamut of sensitive info types. Each of the labels and sensitive input types that we created took four to six hours of initial setup and work. The deployment itself is pretty instantaneous, but getting the data back and actually seeing the labels and sensitive info types come back in the form of data tagging definitely takes some time. Depending on the size of your repository, it can take longer to scan the data and label it while going through all the algorithms. It probably took a good two to three days to actually see some meaningful data.

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.

We didn't evaluate any other product because it was just way too convenient. It is a part of our Microsoft licensing, so we were already paying for it. There wasn't anything appealing to try a third-party solution or anything like that.

I would advise others to definitely go to the documentation first and plan ahead. It is definitely something you plan, and it definitely requires a kind of a crawl-walk-run approach, so you definitely want to plan for it. I would also suggest taking advantage of the testing and reporting features that are available to be able to do a pilot and test it before you actually deploy it.

I would rate Microsoft Endpoint DLP a nine out of ten. There is a little area for improvement, but it is definitely the best in class.

I am working on Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for multiple locations like SharePoint, OneDrive, device level, and exchange level. We also use it for on-premises and cloud applications, including Power BI. We have implemented it in multiple locations with different conditions and actions.

I like the sensitivity labels and data security posture management for AI. Insider risk management and data retention are also beneficial. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention usually performs well, except for endpoint Data Loss Prevention, which may need improvements.

Endpoint Data Loss Prevention needs to be improved as it is not up to expectations. Auto labeling and Data Loss Prevention (DLP) for devices need improvement as well.

I have been working with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for one and a half years.

Sometimes the solution is not stable when the internal connection is not reliable, so this aspect needs improvement.

For Microsoft ecosystem, scalability is good. However, for device level, it needs improvement. Onboarding is fine, however, the policy working and detection technology need enhancements.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is cloud-based and does not require traditional installation. Maintenance is minimal.

I rate the overall solution 3 out of 10.