Microsoft BitLocker Reviews

We use BitLocker to assure that our confidential data is protected.

As a Microsoft shop, we find this product easy to use. It's not a problem.

The pricing should be improved.

We have been using Microsoft BitLocker for several years.

In the past, there had been some issues. However, they've fixed them. The stability has drastically improved.

BitLocker is a scalable product.

We do not really need the technical support.

The initial setup is straightforward.

For reasons unknown, Microsoft products seem to be getting more expensive.

We are a Microsoft shop and tend to use their solutions.

Overall, BitLocker is a good product and I recommend implementing it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We used Microsoft BitLocker to protect our laptops from theft. We have auditors that come and check to see the security of our systems and with this solution we are secure.

The solution could improve by having a centralized GUI for management.

I used Microsoft BitLocker within the past 12 months.

Microsoft BitLocker is stable.

I have a very small project and I implemented Microsoft BitLocker using GPO. Previously, we deploy Microsoft BitLocker using MBAM.

You can do a silent remote deployment very fast.

Microsoft BitLocker is a free feature when you are using Microsoft solutions.

I could advise any company to then deploy Microsoft BitLocker, first of all, because the product is free and the end user's computer performance is not affected. There are some products that when you install it on the end user's system, their system can become very slow.

I rate Microsoft BitLocker an eight out of ten.

We use it for encrypting data and storage for the most part. We keep it up to date in terms of the version.

It basically brings us in compliance. We are required to encrypt the handling of data, the transmission of the data, and storage of the data. So, when people are working with the data, and they download it to the laptops, we can safely say it is encrypted at that point to meet our requirements. It is pretty transparent to the end-user since the encryption is done without them really doing it.

Our need was to protect our portable devices. So, our thumb drives get automatically encrypted. Any attached storage gets automatically encrypted for our laptops in case they get lost or stolen when people travel.

I liked the way it works with our Microsoft tools. As we roll out Intune, we can validate if the device has been encrypted, and if not, we can push it down. It is pretty simple to deploy. 

Their interoperability with our tools, which are the Microsoft tool, can be improved. It needs to be geared towards more of the wraparound of the zero trust. There are solutions we're looking at that do encryption plus X, Y, and Z. So, we're looking at the ability to wrap around the product with other features.

The biggest one for us is revoking access. So, even though someone downloads something to a device, we want the ability to cloak that device or data and bring it back or make that data unusable for that person. Currently, BitLocker doesn't give us that ability. It basically encrypts it. We're seeing if identity management or IAM allows us to do that. We're kind of looking at third-party software that does that for us.

Usually, Microsoft sees what other third-party companies do and then either adopts it or buys the third-party company, and that's kind of what we're looking into. That's our need. It'd be a lot better if it was all under one mirror or one window, instead of having a couple of different vendors working on it. So, if Microsoft could solve that, it would be awesome. They should look at the third-party enhancements that people are doing, and then take the encryption a step further by adding those features to BitLocker. Microsoft has different components. They have identity management, but is it tied to encryption? BitLocker is mostly tied to devices, but it would be best for me if I get a piece of data and I am able to encrypt it all the way through using BitLocker. Currently, BitLocker is basically tied at the device level instead of the data level.

I would just like them to look at what other people are doing in terms of encryption as a whole and offer the encryption not only tied to the device, but also to the file level. They should add features on that in terms of access control and reporting. We should be able to see who has access to it and who has touched a file. So, we're going towards the zero trust model and the zero trust reporting. It is a "We don't trust anybody" type of deal. So, it is not just the device, it is the data. They should try to wrap it around the data at the file level and not at the device level.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

So far, so good. We haven't had too many problems with managing the keys or anything else. Probably the only concern is that we manage it. Individuals are not doing it themselves. The other thing is as we take over companies or merge companies, or the other way around, we have to make sure that we get those keys to the kingdom per se. So, we always got to look out for that as well.

So far, so good. Mostly, anything we deal with Microsoft is pretty scalable. Again, it is kind of tied to devices, but you can essentially manage it, which makes it simple.

In terms of its usage, we force it on everybody, so it is non-binding. No matter who you are in a company, if you have a managed device, it is going to be encrypted. It is a requirement, so it is being used extensively. Its usage will increase as the number of employees increase.

I don't think we've had many issues with them. We push it through our SolarWinds product, so for most of the issues we've had, we probably had to deal with SolarWind's side to make sure that everything was pushed correctly. We didn't go to the Microsoft side. Our software vendor might have dealt with Microsoft directly but not us.

The only solutions that we've had in place were standalone encrypted thumb drives. We had not rolled out BitLocker until then, so we had a need to encrypt thumb drives. We had bought Aegis thumb drives that came encrypted. After we got the encryption rolled out, when someone connected a thumb drive, it was automatically encrypted, or they couldn't store data on it. Once we went to that method, we didn't purchase any more Aegis encrypted thumb drives.

We have it on-prem, and we have a couple of devices in the cloud, but we are a hybrid environment. Our main thing was to get it on our traveling laptops and protect them. We push it through another vendor, not Microsoft. We push it through another SolarWinds vendor, and then we push it down. The only thing that we've had problems with was that the encryption level wasn't as high as we needed it by default. So, we had to do some tweaking to get the correct encryption level that we wanted. It is all default. So, you have to be aware of how you deploy it. If you deploy it one way, it doesn't really fully encrypt the machine.

It took days only because it was a slow rollout. It was intentionally a slow rollout. It didn't take long to do it, but we just wanted to make sure it was done right and correctly.

We just implemented it in-house. In terms of maintenance, it is a small staff. We rely on our software to help us with the patching and everything. We have reports that kickback to us. If for some reason, encryption was turned off or encryption wasn't deployed correctly, we'd get reports sent to us. So, a lot of stuff is automated in terms of monitoring the compliance to encryptions, and our response to that is pretty fast. We just manage it with our current staff. We don't have anybody directly tied to just doing that.

I don't know the costs. In terms of Microsoft licensing, we are at E3 on the business, and we're in the process of pricing out and moving to E5. So, a lot of this is included within our licensing agreements.

If you don't implement this, you have to implement something else. You have to have some type of encryption. In the past, people wanted a layered approach to security. They wanted to have different vendors, and they wanted it to be able to have that overlap of vendor support on security, but the reality is that everybody looks to Microsoft. If you look at the SolarWind attack, who do they go to help resolve it? They went straight to Microsoft. Therefore, we're getting away from that thought process of divide and conquer. We're just trying to align everything up with a single pane of glass so that we can build on our Microsoft tools. In the past, we would have resisted being tied to one security.

I can't rate it any lower than eight out of 10. The only reason why I don't rate it a 10 is that they can do more with it. It is good at what it does, but it needs to do more. It is never going to get a 10 from me because it is never going to be perfect, but there is more to do. 

BitLocker is a feature of which enables hard drive encryption. It's similar to Symantec Endpoint Encryption. For us, both go hand-in-hand, however, BitLocker has an advantage in that it stores the key in TPM. 

The hard drive encryption is very good.

Right now, the problem for us is, if a laptop is stolen, how they address it with the hard drive if it is already protected in BitLocker? We cannot protect anything until we have a centralized server feed where w can get all the information from all the laptop and the device if it does get stolen. Currently, to solve this, we are using a solution called Unbound.

I'm a hardcore developer. I don't know whether the solution has any source files. That said, I don't see anything that's really lacking, feature-wise. 

It's possible that the time it takes to pull items in to BitLocker could be reduced a bit. It can take a long time - sometimes up to 90 minutes.

I've been using the solution since I started working for my current company. I haven't been with them for so long and therefore haven't been working with the solution for too long just yet.

We have about 80,000 laptops and an encryption rate of approximately 99%. The stability seems to be pretty good.

I haven't attempted to scale the solution. I wouldn't be able to properly discuss how scalable it is at this time.

Currently, we have the solution on approximately 80,000 laptops.

I'm not sure if we will increase usage. I'm actually considering changing the solution in the near future.

I haven't really had any contact with technical support. Since I've never used them, I can't really discuss if they are responsive or knowledgable. Right now, my sole purpose is to look for an alternative to Unbound, and therefore I don't work too much with BitLocker troubleshooting.

I didn't handle the initial setup. It would be impossible for me to discuss the process or to talk about if it is difficult or straightforward. I didn't handle any aspect of the implementation.

I'm not really involved in the pricing aspect of the solution. I don't know if it is expensive or reasonably priced.

I essentially joined the company and since I got here all the laptops and endpoints have been encrypted using BitLocker. We are using IBM as management for all the data and to stop Microsoft from taking away Unbound support.

We are looking for an alternative. We're curious about Symantec or endpoint encryptions that I can use with BitLocker, on top of the Symantec client that I have. 

We're using the latest version of the solution, from what I understand. We load the solution directly onto laptops.

I would recommend the solution. However, if I find another endpoint solution, I may switch. I'm not tied to this product.

I don't have a lot of experience on the solution just yet. I'm still evaluating it in a lot of ways, and discovering the features.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use the solution ncrypt any agency data . We probably have about 3,800 users on 5,000 plus computers and there are a variety of roles with some people doing data entry all the way through to system administrators. We're a statewide agency. We'll probably increase usage in another few years when we have more computers. I work as the Desktop Operations Manager in the company and we're a customer of Microsoft. 

I think there is some room for improvement for end users and technical staff. They are the ones required to support the computers, learn how the solution functions and to troubleshoot. For now, they have to wing it most of the time and it could be better. 

For additional features, I'd like to see something more manageable by our agency. We had a portal where we could manage these. I know there are products out there that have portals where you can actually manage the BitLocker and that would be much better. If we lose a computer now it's unclear whether Absolute Computrace can find it if it's been encrypted. 
We have some issues with Microsoft about that. 

I've been using this solution for four years. 

I think stability is fine. My personal impression is that it's working the way it's supposed to. I  believe that the problem is on the end user side because they don't know how it functions. They get frustrated and accidentally activate the blocker and get locked out. 

We've never had a problem with that. 

We really haven't had much technical support on this other than from Dell trying to help us and Microsoft telling us everything is fine. We've only just started trying to determine what the problem is so hopefully things will improve. 

Before this, we used Wave but when they were bought out by another company we switched to BitLocker. 

Initial setup was straightforward. 

This is not my area but I don't think we pay annual licensing costs. I think we just pay for computer leasing, and all fees are included in the purchase. I don't think we're getting our money's worth because we're often unable to locate computers that have been lost. 

I think it's important to involve the technical team when selecting a product and testing it out, rather than having the upper management make the decisions regarding which products to purchase. It's also important to get upfront support, technical support and maintenance, and maybe somehow get a portal where they can manage it themselves rather than it just kind of existing. 

I would rate this product an eight out of 10. It does what it's supposed to do and it's just the troubleshooting that's a problem.  

It is an encryption tool and provides security.               

I have been using Microsoft BitLocker for the last two years.

The stability is satisfactory but I would rate it eight out of ten.

I have never contacted support myself, but they are extremely well-supported.

Positive

I would rate the overall product eight out of ten. 

I use the solution to log into my admin-protected computer.

The most valuable feature is the authentication process which is very fast.

My overall experience is based solely on one point: the gateway to the admin site. Even though my password is correct, I often have to make multiple attempts to log in. Microsoft BitLocker can help streamline the login process so that it works on the first attempt.

I would like the next release to include a fingerprint unlock feature, as I am currently required to use the PIN provided by my organization.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The solution is stable.

We have between 300 to 400 people using the solution in our organization.

I give the solution a seven out of ten.

I recommend the solution to others.

This solution is for endpoint encryption. It helps us avoid data loss. 

Having encryption has been great. It's very useful. It's 256-bit encryption. It's very hard to break it to get at the data itself. 

It's stable and reliable. 

The solution can scale.

It comes bundled with other Microsoft solutions.

Technical support is okay. 

They should offer better login capabilities that are more secure. Right now, they only offer SSO. They need to offer multi-factor authentication. 

The support could be a bit faster. 

I've been working with the solution for six months. 

The solution is very stable. 

There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is very scalable. It comes inside a Microsoft bundle, and if you buy a bundle big enough, one that already fits your company's needs, then it will fit your encryption needs. 

We have six clients using the solution at this time. 

The support is pretty standard. It's fine. We have to wait one or two hours once we've created tickets. Of course, we would like them to be a bit faster.

The initial setup is a bit complex. It works on Windows, yet it may not be compatible with other operating systems.

We deployed the solution over the last eight months. We keep getting more customers and continue to implement it. 

We also manage the solution for the clients. 

In orer to buy ButLocker, you need to buy some other Microsoft products. It's not a standalone product. 

Typically, customers pay a monthly licensing fee.

The product is good at protecting data. I'd rate it nine out of ten.