McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention Reviews

We've used the solution mostly for antivirus and malware protection only. There's some scanning of emails, phishing websites, and then also scanning my pen drive or hard drive or external hard drives.

It's good in that it does what it is intended to do.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is easy to set up.

The solution takes up too much CPU and memory.

I've used the solution for a few years. It's been about six or seven years. 

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

I'm not sure about the scalability. I only use it for personal devices and have never attempted to expand it.

I'm using the solution myself. No one else uses it. 

I've never had an issue with McAfee. I've never had to reach out to technical support.

I'm also familiar with Kaspersky and Norton Security Premium.

I previously used an open-source solution, however, that was six or seven years ago.

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. it's not overly complex or difficult. 

The deployment only takes five to ten minutes. It's pretty fast.

You can do the deployment yourself. It doesn't require any help per se. 

I pay a yearly licensing fee which is about $1000 in my local currency. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I'm happy with its capabilities. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

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.

We are a consulting firm and this is one of the solutions that we implement for our clients.

Our customers primarily use it to protect local files that they are saving to external devices.

The most valuable feature is the ability to control access to USB drives and other external devices.

The interface is very complicated to use and it is easy to forget how it works.

There needs to be support for blocking the sending of files by email because even if you block or remove an external disk, the files are not protected. As long as the files can still be sent via email, it is useless to protect them from being copied to an external drive.

I have been working with this McAfee data protection product for more than two years.

Scalability is not really applicable because it is only dealing with an endpoint device. There is no impact on scalability.

I have not been in contact with McAfee's technical support.

Symantec has a similar solution available.

The initial setup is complex. The configuration requires that many points have to be considered before it can be done properly.

The price is high for this type of product.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

We are a solutions provider. We make recommendations to people and companies concerning virtualization solutions, server solutions, file sharing and things of this nature. So we also need to protect servers or client machines or PCs and so often we need to recommend the purchase of some antivirus solutions. McAfee is one of the solutions we use in our recommendations.  

It provides us with an excellent solution to recommend to clients for security.  

One of the most valuable things for us about this product is that we needed some solution that can be used in desktop virtualization. We are not using the antivirus program in common ways. We use antivirus in desktop virtualization.  

The most important solution for us is protecting the virtual machines that we host on our servers. We need security protection for our clients and server solutions, security protection for virtual desktop solutions and security for the cloud-based system solutions. We work in all of these fields.  

One thing that would help us is if the McAfee agent that we install on virtual machines became lighter. It is a bit heavy for installation on virtual machines and it uses too much in the way of resources. It takes a lot of the CPU, the RAM, and other resources in comparison to some other application like Kaspersky. Kaspersky Security Solution is a lighter solution than McAfee. McAfee is a little heavy for many installations and does not work for all clients and situations.  

It would also be good if the McAfee solution contained specialized features just for the virtual desktop. Some brands of security solutions already have this type of feature which makes it easier to use them for desktop virtualization. I can not find that currently in the McAfee product.  

We have been using this product for about 10 years for some internal solutions and for our clients.  

Of course, a product like this has to be designed to be stable. The whole point of McAfee is to be a stable, dependable solution for total security.  

In our experience, the product is easy to scale both on server and desktop visualization.  

The number of clients we have using McAfee Total Protection for data within our company and within our client deployments is hard to say in total. We have lots of clients in various territories. We work in five countries in the Middle East. So I don't know the exact number of users, but I know there are more than 1,000 SMBs, or small to medium businesses, that we have deployed for.  

The users at each site are IT Managers, IT Admin, Security Admins or some type of IT expert for the administration.  

I have previous and current experience in usage of some other security applications like McAfee, like Kaspersky, like BitDefender, and like SOPHOS. So I have experience with a lot of these kinds of products and know which to recommend for particular purposes in deployments. We use McAfee because it fits certain client needs but we still sometimes use other solutions for other clients. Everyone is not the same.  

We also have our own security solutions and we do not use only third-party applications in our company. We have an ISMS (information security management system) that we customize for what we need it to do.  

For the Data Security product, McAfee is easy to install and it is easy to use. This is not the setup and usability that are part of the problem when it comes to this product.  

We do our own implementations.  

I did consider other options from the other vendors I've worked with before. I had kind of a friendly connection with the BitDefender company, for example. But when it comes down to making a choice for clients I have to tell them that the application is the heaviest security program. It uses the most resources of any of the products I know well, so it was not really a good solution for us to recommend. Their solution uses more resources than even McAfee. 

Advice that I would give to others looking into implementing this solution is the same as when our customers ask us for any kind of security solution. We almost always recommended that they go with McAfee. McAfee is a great choice for most cases.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate McAfee Total Protection for Data as a nine out of ten. It is very good except for the resource drain.  

We use the solution for data.

The solution is simple with simple settings. It provides good protection for our data.

The product’s pricing could be cheaper.

I have been using McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention for five years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

The solution is easy to scale.

Around 3000 users are using the solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The initial setup is simple and quick, but the configuration is complex. We have to put documents and other pieces which cannot be sent to an outside company.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

When this solution is used it requires a lot of administration because the users can have difficulties using it and require assistance. The administrators are continuously modifying the policies for the users. Technical support will be used frequently.

I have been using McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention for a few years. 

The stability of the solution can be good. However, the configuration takes a long time for it to be done properly.

We have approximately three customers using this solution.

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is scalable.

The support from McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention could improve.

The initial setup of McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is complex. The configuration can be complex. For example, configuring the policies and filters.

Our team did the implementation of the solution.

The price of the solution could improve, it is expensive. We typically sell one and three-year licenses.

The amount of staff needed for maintenance depends on the size of the company.

I rate McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention a seven out of ten.