McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Reviews

My company uses McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention for data protection.

The most valuable features of the solution are that it is a single agent and single management.

The product fails to offer automatic classification capabilities to its users. The tool should offer automatic classification in future releases.

I have been using McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention for around ten years. My team uses the product.

In the latest version of the solution, we have faced some issues, as per the feedback from my team. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight to eight and a half out of ten.

The initial setup process was easy.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

Around 10 to 15 engineers are involved in the maintenance phase of the solution.

Since the tool doesn't offer automatic classification, I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

We use the product as an anti-virus solution. It prevents virus attacks on my laptops and mobile phones. 

I am impressed with the tool's firewalls and web protection. 

I would like the solution to improve the AI features for anti-virus detection. I also want the software to include a tool for malware detection. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

I have used other anti-virus products like Sophos and Kaspersky. I switched to McAfee because it is easier to use and has more features than others. 

The tool is easy to setup. I would rate the product's setup an eight out of ten. The product's deployment takes 10-15 minutes to complete. 

I would rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

Our primary use case for the solution is data leakage prevention, which we deploy on-premises. For example, we had a confidential document signed by one of our HR members bearing the details of some financials for the company. It was mistakenly sent to the company, all the employers, and employees, but we had just controlled this document from the DLP at that time. We restricted the document from being removed from every company computer through McAfee, so the document was deleted from every desktop. We send all the data over email or on the file server, SharePoint, or any web portal. So, for example, whenever we upload any data, DLP keeps a copy of it, makes a mirror, and keeps a copy of it in its database, securing it with an alarm. We set some words in a document or an email, and an alert will be generated for us, and DLP will make a copy of this data, allowing us to check if the data has been sent to another company on a web portal or file-sharing server. 

The solution is very user-friendly and valuable.

The user interface is messy and could be simplified. It could be more fruitful because the UI part of the DLP is also messy.

We have been using the solution for approximately four years.

The solution is scalable.

We do not have experience with customer service and support.

The initial setup is straightforward. It only requires installing the agent on the end nodes, and the management console, installation and configuration are not difficult. 

We implemented the solution in-house, and only one person is required for maintenance.

From a licensing point of view, it is good because we don't need to procure the license against each node. It has a single license, and we can use it on multiple nodes.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. The solution is good and has many features, but the user interface can be improved.

We primarily used the solution for data loss prevention.

It is for national identity purposes, for our management, office management of mail, for sending office documents, and for monitoring bad behavior via email or writing.

The solution is stable and reliable.

It can scale. 

The product is very easy to maintain.

The product is difficult to use. 

I don't like the McAfee product and have had a negative user experience. 

They really need to simplify their offering. The interface is not so good.

McAfee needs to clarify its rules. 

If you don't know what you are doing, scaling can be challenging.

I used the solution for four months. 

We never had a complaint from IT. The solution seemed to have been stable. 

We had 150 people using the solution. 

If you know what you are doing, it's scalable. That said, if you use the interface and you are not a qualified person for that, it gets complicated. 

We did not directly reach out to McAfee, the corporation, in terms of support. We can get help from their partners. If we have questions, we'll ask the partner, not McAfee directly. 

We've moved from McAfee products as we changed our environment, and we focus mostly on Microsoft now. 

I now prefer Microsoft. If you had asked me nearly eight months ago, I would have said I hate Microsoft. While I'm still not a huge fan, I appreciate the scalability and visibility. It's a native environment of Windows 10, Windows 8.1 servers, and Android and iPhones. The price is very low as well for CRM and ERP solutions. Now, there is no need to buy any antivirus for the ERP solution if you've got licenses, of course, from Microsoft.

The solution was already pre-installed in an on-premises environment by the time I arrived. I wasn't a part of the initial implementation. 

The maintenance is pretty straightforward. 

I'm not sure what the exact pricing is. 

We were using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd warn new users to prepare for the interface, which is not user-friendly.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

Our main use case of this DLP solution is for endpoint protection of data breaching. Systems have to be protected both internally and externally. Our company offers multiple solutions for endpoint security, network security, data loss prevention and firewalls. We are a service provider and a partner of McAfee. Here in Pakistan, very few companies take data loss prevention seriously. We work with the financial sector and they all need that level of security. I'm an assistant manager of technical support.

Of course the data loss prevention is the most valuable feature. The solution also enables us to customize in that space and that's why I prefer this product. We can add different file types, and different scenarios or implement McAfee DLP on-site for our customers. The solution fulfills the vast majority of our customers' needs. This is a sharp and intuitive solution. 

For our new engineers, it is difficult to understand the McAfee DLP interface, or configure it in the deployment scenario. The UI needs to be simplified. 

I've been using this solution for six years. 

McAfee DLP is very stable. I've compared it with other solutions and it's a very mature and comprehensive solution. 

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup is quite complex. Each scenario is different depending on our customers. We have multiple teams providing multiple services. I have three engineers who work with McAfee and we also provide support. 

My advice to any organization is to support appropriate security levels because following Covid many people have moved to online work and that needs supporting on a security level. Companies should be working in a zero-trust environment.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

I work in a banking environment and we use this solution for security. We are end users and I'm a system administrator. 

There are some good protection features here such as prohibiting people from taking screenshots or taking data that is copied on their external devices. It's easy to use, provides good security and has many valuable features.

It was a struggle prohibiting email content from being sent outside the company. We have some restrictions and obligations from the Central Bank of Jordan and the corporate and ISO and PCITS list. That was a problem for us. I'd like to see GDPR regulations included in this solution as it would enhance the security of the DLP for protecting data. 

I've been using this solution for about 18 months. 

The solution is scalable, but you need to plan ahead and identify your scope very well, including the asset management and asset values. Without that, DLP won't work properly. 

With some initial supervision, the initial setup is straightforward. 

I recommend this product and rate it seven out of 10.

This solution is for credit card protection; credit card numbers, any kind of data storage and data flows from storage to an application, it all goes through DLP filters and policies.

This solution has a rich set of policies and provides a level of protection even for removable devices.

The challenge now is the ability to have sensors, monitoring, and general security and policies on IOT devices. It's a challenge every time I use it and it's been frustrating. There are a lot of vulnerabilities and people can interrogate devices on a network and proliferate different forms of viruses or malware to infect a lot of things within the whole enterprise.

DLP was a very difficult solution to set up and use. It took an expert with a lot of experience to do that for us. It's very hard to implement across the enterprise with the different faces of where the DLP engines live. One of the challenges was that we weren't setting a generic policy, we have many different levels we're dealing with. It touches so many different things that it takes an army to maintain.

The solution is license based and is expensive. Every user, device, file, everything is licensed. There are many layers to licensing costs. It takes a lot of expertise and a lot of work to set that up across the enterprise.

ManTech was a better solution than McAfee but then it was bought out and that sometimes means that development isn't complete and feature richness is lacking. There is a tendency to move backward in capabilities. When it comes to McAfee, DLP works flawlessly while other parts struggle. 

The beauty of McAfee Data Loss Prevention is, for one, it's in a single management product for all other McAfee solutions. It's also a single-agent platform. That's one really unique aspect of Data Loss Prevention. 

The configuration of McAfee is also pretty straightforward. 

On the data loss prevention side, it's pretty straightforward. It's capable of doing the basic tasks such as basic data loss prevention capabilities that any DLP can do. 

With respect to its capability of being able to block, being able to provide responses and justification, and the management of the DLP in itself, it is pretty straightforward. 

One thing that I like about McAfee is the Tamper Protection and the help desk feature. Symantec also has that, however, the help desk feature from McAfee is more user-friendly but also it's more strict and more secure, as compared to the one in Symantec.

The pricing of the product is excellent. It's very affordable. 

In my experience, it's not really user-friendly for me, in terms of how I navigate with the ePolicy Orchestrator. They need to upgrade their management console. 

You can't navigate McAfee without going through all of the administration and product guides. You have to read everything first before you navigate it. That's how it was for me, at least, in my experience. However, in my colleague's case, that didn't happen and I don't know why I can't just navigate the McAfee management console without reading first the administrator or product guide. What's really tedious about reading those things is that the documents are separate. The product guide and the administrator guide for the DLP solution are quite different from the administrator guide and product guide of the ePolicy Orchestrator.

They need to improve more with partial matching and exact data matching. The partial matching and the exact data matching are features of Symantec. There, it's pretty sophisticated. If McAfee wants to catch up with that, they have to upgrade their partial matching capabilities.

We also had a client who wanted to have at least three, two to three, set of conditions on a single policy or on a single rule, to have that kind of combination. For example, a combination of a serial number from a device, from a removable device, plus a user and a computer or the hosting or the workstation. That's three combinations. User, computer, and removable device. What they wanted is to have the three pieces of that combination in a single rule, however, we were not able to do that as McAfee conditional statements are only limited to two. That's something that they need also to improve. They need to make it more flexible.

I've used McAfee for three years at this point. It's been a while. 

McAfee offers very good technical support and we have been very happy with its capabilities. We find support to be helpful and responsive. 

I also work with Symantec. It's a bit more expensive, and I find McAfee offers a few better, more advanced features. 

This is one of the least expensive solutions on the market right now. It's even less expensive than Symantec.

I'm using the latest version of the solution at this time. 

The clients I work with are mostly enterprise-level businesses. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. For the most part, I have been pleased with its capabilities, however, there are some improvements that could be made. 

We are a consulting house for various clients. We provide consultancy to our clients in terms of which product they should use based on their requirements and environment.

Our clients use this solution for DLP. They are using it for the basis of endpoint protection, prevention of malware infection, detection, and management of the endpoint.

The client has not fully utilized the DLP because they have not done the data classification well enough to actually get the full value of the DLP solution.

If a DLP is implemented correctly, the value is that you can address the human error issues. You can manage your compliance in line with legislation such as GDPR and POPIA. 

The value proposition is great if it is implemented correctly.

If you do not have a team that is supporting your DLP implementation, there may be a challenge, which is a concern.

The support in South Africa should have more knowledgeable and professional McAfee resources.

Our client is not very happy with the lack of support, the skills, and the effectiveness of the tool.

Our client has been using McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention for three years.

It works and is stable if it is implemented correctly.

It is a scalable solution. We have two customers who are using it and one who will be moving onto another solution. They are considering Cynet or CrowStrike.

The support in South Africa could be much better.

I was the chief information security officer at one of the largest banks in Africa. I have used all of the products including McAfee DLP, McAfee Endpoint, and Forcepoint DLP as well.

I wasn't involved in the implementation for this client in particular. 

My experience with McAfee from a vendor perspective is if you have the right skills, it can be deployed quite easily. The only challenge is it uses a lot of hardware.

The time it takes for deployment depends on the variety of clients. Some clients have 1,000 users, so it's quite easy. 

The actual deployment before rollout to all of your users is not long. It takes approximately two weeks.

The number of people required to maintain this solution depends on the scale of the project, the customer itself, and the number of users. There is a lot of awareness that needs to go into DLP and Endpoint DLP to train the user.

We utilized specialists to implement it for us because we are not a vendor. 

We are vendor agnostic. We advise our clients, and then we get professional people like McAfee Professional Service to install it. We wouldn't get involved in it.

We use integrators.

If the client purchases the entire suite of McAfee Endpoint, the license is included.

We evaluated Cynet and CrowdStrike in comparison to McAfee. Our client wants to find an alternative to McAfee Endpoint Security.

We are purely consultants. We do not get involved primarily with the implementation. 

What we do is advise clients. For example, we are doing a lot of work for Coca-Cola and we advise them on how to configure.

It doesn't matter whether you're using Defender, or whether you are using MCAS as a cloud solution, we help you configure according to the standard that is applicable, whether it's a legislative standard or an internal policy. 

We ensure that the necessary implementation and configuration settings are aligned. Then we give it back to the technical integrators to implement according to the standard that we have set. That is the level of involvement we have. We don't do the implementation, but we advise on how the implementation should be done in line with the internal policy or the legislation.

I would not recommend this solution to others. I think there are better products available at the moment.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for the restriction of Androids. It's for virus protection and for data loss prevention. I'm able to install the agent and forcefully upgrade all the agents in one console from EPU, hence we can protect some runners from the whole archive. I'm able to protect viruses from accessing the website. 

The ability to block all USBs from the McAfee portal has been great. 

There aren't too many good things I could say about the solution at this point, however. It really hasn't been working the way it should for us.

We're not very satisfied with the solution. There are some bugs on it that we've been having to deal with. Due to this fact, we've been looking for other options.

McAfee in India really isn't working the way it should right now.

The solution needs to improve its EDR systems.

The solution needs to be a one-stop protection shop. And yet, the DLP isn't strong. Anyone can break it quite easily.

The solution takes up a lot of hardware space and uses too much RAM and CPU. It sucks up our resources due to multiple processes. 

The processing time is too low. Each and every interval should receive a vulnerability scan, and yet McAfee can't seem to do this. On top f that there are bugs within it that make checking vulnerabilities a problem.

Customer support is terrible. Compliance is also very bad.

We've been using this solution for about three years.

The stability is okay. If we were to rate it out of five, I'd give it a three. It's not the worst, however, it could be better. It offers a moderate amount of stability.

I'm not happy with the solution's ability to scale. If you have multiple files, the problem is McAfee also has multiple files, and, when the user is in working mode, suddenly the solution will start scanning without first asking the users and without showing the amount of time it will take. Suddenly your CPU and RAM take a dive. It affects everything. It might be a bug when you upgrade the solution. It's possible that it's not upgrading correctly or not connecting appropriately.

We have about 500 people using the solution currently.

Technical support has not been helpful for us. We tried to reach out during the implementation process and were given a run-around. We realized afterward we needed to go through a vendor. McAfee won't help us directly. Except that, from day one, no one could help us or answer our questions.

With most companies, technical support is amazing. That's not true in this case. FortiGate, for example, has great customer service.

We're looking at a different solution right now, as this one isn't working for us. We're currently using it, however, very soon we'll implement a different solution instead of this one.

The initial setup is complex, and on top of that, when you try to reach out for help and try the customer support number, they tell you that you are calling the wrong place and redirect you somewhere else instead of helping you. You need to go through a vendor to get any help, and they have to go to McAfee on your behalf.

In terms of maintenance, many other antivirus companies have software that provides maintenance. If you're going for the on-premises solution, maybe a server requires maintenance every six months or one year and there is usually a printed maintenance checklist. It's an offline process. However, no one can sort out this process on my team. On top of that, if you are going to increase the volume, you will need to upgrade and it is another platform that you have to buy and that will require maintenance.

The pricing is kind of expensive. There are other options out there that work better for the price.

With the bugs we're dealing with on this solution, we're looking for other options. We've looked at Cloud Security Intel and Trend Micro, for example. We've also been looking at one of EI Intelligence's early response DLP.

We're just customers. We don't have a relationship with McAfee.

We're using the most up to date version of the solution. The EP is version 6.0.0.197 and the host edition is 8.0. The DLP endpoint version is 11.4.0.452.

I would never recommend this solution to other organizations. I'd rate it four out of ten overall.