Symantec Data Loss Prevention Reviews

Our primary use case for Symantec Data Loss Prevention revolves around addressing internal data security concerns, particularly email communication and data leakage prevention.

Symantec Data Loss Prevention has significantly improved our organization, particularly regarding data management and incident response. The solution has streamlined internal processes and enhanced data security measures. By integrating Symantec into our management systems, we've achieved better packaging and handling of sensitive information.

The most valuable features of Symantec Data Loss Prevention (DLP) are the Optical Character Recognition (OCR) functionality and its automation capabilities.

The product's pricing and support services need improvement.

The platform is stable. Initially, there were minor delays during the setup phase, especially when implementing certain features on the cloud. However, these issues have been resolved over time, and the system runs smoothly. It has been consistently reliable for the past three years. While it may demand slightly higher bandwidth, it remains easily adaptable to any network environment.

I rate the platform's scalability a nine out of ten. Currently, we are working with three companies as our customers for the product, one of which boasts over 10,000 users.

Our experience with customer service and support has improved over time. Previously, we encountered technical issues and concerns while working in the same area of DLP. However, in 2020, we noticed a positive shift. The team has become more responsive and effective in addressing our needs. The personnel handling technical support are helpful.

To deploy Symantec to protect sensitive information in our company, we implement various policies such as web, endpoint, mail, and cloud prevention. While the deployment process itself is simple, there is a requirement for an Oracle database, which can add a layer of complexity, particularly for smaller businesses that may not have the infrastructure readily available. However, we offer a software solution that manages this aspect. We leverage both on-premises and cloud-based functionalities, with customization options available for policies. Default configurations work well for cloud-based deployments, and we utilize comprehensive licensing packages. Cloud management simplifies deployment and implementation tasks significantly compared to on-premises setups, reducing the burden on our team and clients. However, there can be challenges when transitioning existing customers from on-premises to cloud-based solutions, particularly regarding feature availability and accessibility.

The platform is expensive.

The platform provides valuable data for preventing loss in various ways. It operates on a cloud-based platform and is beneficial through email and the web.

The incident response capability has been instrumental in mitigating potential data loss. The response agents are deployed strategically, and licenses govern their access. It ensures that only authorized personnel with the appropriate IT label can intervene.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution is pretty stable. They are not bad; they are pretty complete. But I'm not a big fan of Symantec.

The most valuable feature is file-level DLP. It gives the possibility of creating rules; it's possible to know when a file is with the laptop or computer and servers. It can be any type of file.

The console is not the best one. There is room for improvement in the management console. 

I have been working with this solution for one year now. 

The stability is good enough. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. We have this in all geographies nowadays. So, it's very scalable.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. Because it's not only a question of technicality, it's a question of privacy, it knows everything, so I don't like it much.

We use it for data loss prevention.

I like the software as a whole. It's a good one. The tool's really working well, and the agents are good. It's not heavy, and it's working fine with the clients.

Technical support is pathetic. Stability and scalability can be improved as well. It would also be better if it could restrict Bluetooth transfers.

Symantec also uses Oracle databases, which isn't really convenient for most customers. It would be better if they switched to SQL.

I've been using Symantec Data Loss Prevention for two years.

It isn't stable. For example, when we compare it to other solutions like Bluetooth, it can't be controlled in Symantec, but others can. 

Scalability can be improved. 

Over the past few months, Symantec's support has come down drastically. Even though the issues were escalated, it remained unresolved.

Unfortunately, it's pathetic, and that's the reason why I decided to stop using Symantec, and I'm going to find an alternative.

The initial setup was really good. It's not very easy and also not very complex. There were some issues, but we managed, and it was running well. Managing Symantec DLP isn't difficult. It's easy. 

The price is competitive. Until last year, the price was okay, but it just increased more than 100% this year. There was no justification for that.

Unfortunately, I can't recommend Symantec DLP to potential users. This is because the support isn't good. So in that aspect, unfortunately, I cannot recommend Symantec.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Symantec DLP a three.

The tool helps to block based on different classifications such as characters and channels. 

Users like the product because of its simplicity and the rate of detection. 

Symantec Data Loss Prevention's setup needs to be easier and support needs to be improved. 

I have been working with the product for ten years. 

The tool is stable. 

The product is scalable. My company has 1000 users for Symantec Data Loss Prevention. 

The product's setup is not easy. 

The tool's licensing costs are yearly. 

I would rate Symantec Data Loss Prevention a six out of ten. I wouldn't recommend the solution for micro SMEs or small enterprises. It is not recommended for organizations that do not have the technical expertise or in-house support.

DLP's most valuable feature is that it's more granular in terms of creating block-based policies, which gives you more options to create policies in a filtered way.

DLP could be improved by implementing a cloud-based console. The implementation and installation process could also be made less complicated.

I've been using Symantec DLP for three months.

DLP is stable.

If DLP has been deployed correctly, it's stable - if not, you will end up with multiple issues.

Symantec's technical support is generally good, and their responsiveness is ok, but it varies on a case-to-case basis.

The initial setup was complex and couldn't be done without expert help.

We used an integrator.

We compared Forcepoint, which I think is better than Symantec.

I would rate DLP seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for the endpoint machines within the environment.

I'm able to track everyone who is trying to send information outside the environment and to know if they are not supposed to be sending it. I'm also able to see the people who are accessing or maybe try to access the information they are not supposed to be accessing based on their level of classification.

It gives me overall control of who has got access to what and at what point and who can do what with specific information.

The backend side of the server needs improvement.

In a majority of cases, most of the companies are using DLP for endpoint sessions, where you have a user that might be communicating information outside of the company. However, they forget there are actual interfaces that can directly communicate with either the database or other files within the data center that uses end-to-end encryption. In those cases, you might need things like your DLP to be able to monitor and block some of that. The solution needs to catch information communicated through the data center on the server-side.

The solution is quite stable, especially when you run it on a Linux platform and when you code it and set it end-to-end on a Windows machine.

I've never had any issues around scalability, mostly because of the environment I'm running on. We have about 50 users on the solution currently. 

It's used quite extensively in our environment as a security cluster, but going forward I don't think we will be adding more people to the environment. It's a minimized environment, so there's a limit to the number of people that are allowed to work with it.

We've never had an issue outside our capabilities, so we've never had to contact technical support.

I previously used McAfee DLP at a different company. I'm not sure what my current organization used previously.

The initial setup of the solution was straightforward. It took us less than a week to make sure that we created all the rules. 

The setup itself it took less than two hours. However, applying all the rules and the configurations, and all the different qualities took longer. It total, everything took close to a week.

We only need two people for deployment and maintenance.

We implemented the solution ourselves.

Licensing depends on how you plan your deployment. If you have carefully planned it and you've already looked at the storage capacity and how it's going to grow over a period of two to five years, then you'll hardly have any problems or issues. If you have not planned it correctly then you might run into some issues.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

I would advise others that the solution does need careful planning before attempting an implementation.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

DLP's most valuable feature is compliance.

DLP doesn't work well with Mac OS systems and tends to give false positives. There are also problems in terms of CPU utilization because all the policies are based on a traditional DLP system, which makes it quite heavy and creates issues with user experience. In the next release, DLP should include OCR features, and I'd like the agent to be lightweight, which means the policy should be in the cloud.

I've been using Symantec DLP for two to three years.

I don't find DLP stable.

DLP has no issues with scalability.

Since being acquired by Broadcom, the support has really degraded for small and medium enterprises. They don't help with anything and just send emails when we ask them to come on call.

Negative

The initial setup was easy.

DLP could be a bit cheaper.

I would rate DLP as five out of ten.

The most valuable features of Symantec Data Loss Prevention are endpoint security,  endpoint agent, and DLP. Additionally, we have been satisfied with the policies.

Symantec Data Loss Prevention could improve by having better system resource management, cloud option, and more features.

I have been using Symantec Data Loss Prevention for approximately eight years.

The solution is stable.

I have been satisfied with the technical support.

The price of Symantec Data Loss Prevention could be reduced.

I rate Symantec Data Loss Prevention an eight out of ten.