Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Reviews

My main use case is to upload mailboxes. We're using Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to upload mailboxes. The migration tool that's built into the Microsoft Hybrid isn't working on our domain. We're a government contractor, so we have policies, and I believe that one of those policies is preventing it from going up. We have two domains. The other one worked fine. The second domain, we weren't able to migrate. So we had to use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

My favorite feature about Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is actually quite simple. There's a handful of things that you do. You create a new batch. It'll give you a unique ID. You copy that unique ID, it's a URL, and then you can put that into a script that we wrote so we just paste that in our script and then it uses that URL to upload all of those mailboxes, and then we can use that to import. The simplicity of that interface is what I appreciate most.

I assess the ability to prevent unauthorized sharing of sensitive information within the organization by locking it down to security groups so that only administrators have access.

I think that a feature on the side where you could click on something with a question mark, and then if you click on it, it would open up a new window and give you more information on that, almost as a training tool for the website that you're already logged into and already connected to, could be improved in Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

I see that there's a lot of content in Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, and when I click on it and look around, I wonder what certain features do, but there's not enough documentation and explanation.

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

I assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention as having no issues. If I'm using it on a system that doesn't kick me out and I go back, it does log me out and it says, 'You've been logged out.' I appreciate that. I know that a lot of sites don't do that. I've been logged into other systems and still logged in multiple hours later. I've never had Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention go down, and it has never given me any issues.

I did not use customer service. I never needed to.

I did not consider other solutions before starting with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention. We reached out to a third-party vendor to help us with the migrations. They suggested it and said that there's an option of doing this a different way. So we sat down several weeks and several months later, we created the script, tested it, got the bugs out, and then ended up using Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention. It worked the way they said it would.

I can describe the deployment of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention as a website, so it's just a matter of logging into it.

It only takes a few clicks and that's it.

I can say that I've seen a return on investment from Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention because it's allowed us to do the migration for all the users so that we can move forward with other projects that are relying on the users to be in the cloud.

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it goes up to upper management. I am involved with licensing. I do a lot of testing, so if I create an account in the cloud without a license, I have to go and license it. That may not be the same question that it's asking, but regarding pricing, setup, and cost, I'm not involved with that too much.

I do not use the machine learning analysis yet.

I can say that Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention helped improve my ability to discover sensitive data by now knowing that we can do that. We do have a security department that will send us emails or tickets saying, 'Hey, we received spam. Can you take it off everybody's mailbox?' If Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention can do that behind the scenes, or even through AI within Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, that would be very interesting.

My experience with centralizing our DLP program is not that extensive. We just recently moved to the cloud.

I would rate this product a nine overall.

My main use cases involve trying to prevent sensitive files from leaving the company. Any sensitive data that the business has marked as should not be able to leave the company is stopped at the email level, providing significant benefits to our organization.

The feature I appreciate most about Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is the simplicity of labeling files. The classification of policy controls by Microsoft Purview impacts my user productivity in a positive way, but more from a security perspective, helping me more than the user. It finds social security numbers in the files when we scan for it, so that we can prevent those from leaving the company.

To improve Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, I think it would be helpful if we could make bulk labeling easier, as it is a little cumbersome at the moment. The bulk labeling process is a challenge that could use improvement to make it easier, but the user experience is relatively simple, which is good.

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

I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention scales well with the growing needs of my organization. I have expanded usage, and it is an ongoing project. The process of expansion takes a lot of effort from the end-users, but the results are good.

Prior to adopting Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, I was not using another solution to address similar needs.

I would describe my experience with deploying Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention as positive.

I was not really involved in the deployment; one of my team members did that.

I have seen a return on investment with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing is that everything is included in our enterprise licensing, so there are no particular pluses or minuses.

Before selecting Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, I considered solutions like Saiara and Concentrix. What stood out in my evaluation process, either positively or negatively, when comparing the options is that the integration with Microsoft Office and the file system makes it a plus for us.

I assess Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's ability to prevent unauthorized sharing of sensitive information within my organization as working well. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has helped improve my organization's ability to discover sensitive data. We have not seen any sensitive files leave via email, which represents a significant improvement. My advice to another organization considering Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is to give it a try, as it works well with the integration, is relatively simple for the end-users, and the users appreciate it. I would rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention overall as an eight out of ten.

Deploy the whole solution for customers that are starting from zero to hero. The implementation framework for data protection goes as follows:

-Identification of information assets

-Protection, which means placing technological controls to protect the flow of data

-Monitoring through the different dashboards that the portal offers.

The other side of the coin is the internal user monitoring; at the end they are the ones handling the data, this can be archived with IRM, DSPM, CC.

The feature I value most about Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is its native synchronization with all the Office applications that customers already use. Unlike other solutions in the market, such as CrowdStrike, Proofpoint, and Cato, which also provide DLP capabilities, these tools are not able to fully interpret encrypted documents generated by Purview. While they offer strong controls, they cannot manage information with the same level of depth as Microsoft Purview DLP due to its native integration within the Microsoft ecosystem.

The main benefit for organizations is the ability to leverage a technological control that operates natively within their existing Microsoft environment. This enables them to effectively define and govern the flow of data.

When assessing Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and its ability to prevent unauthorized sharing of sensitive information within my organization, I would consider it a strong solution. However, there is a key limitation: the licensing model can be expensive for many customers.

With a base license, organizations can apply controls within the Microsoft environment. However, extending these capabilities to non-Microsoft domains requires an E5 license, which represents a significant investment. Not all organizations have the budget to afford this level of licensing. While the controls themselves are effective, I believe the pricing model should be adjusted based on region, as what is affordable in the United States may not be in other regions. Therefore, pricing should be reviewed or adapted accordingly.

I have been using Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for two and a half years.

Our use cases for Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention include particularly email egress where we're looking for certain types of data to block, primarily for data exfiltration prevention and to combat malicious traffic.

Based on what I've seen, I've anticipated that the use case where we use the most true positives helps us categorize certain emails, allowing us to decide which ones need more attention based on sensitivity, unlike someone's email about marketing.

The features have helped our organization as we can take action as necessary if something appears to be a serious violation. We can take fast corrective action as necessary.

The feature I find most valuable that I'm currently using is the quickness of the emails that the Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention solution sends to us, where we get notifications that say a user has potentially breached our data guideline rules, and we get those alerts continuously, allowing us to enforce them manually. We can triage based on quick and sometimes constant alerts.

The impact of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's classification and policy controls on our productivity within our organization is significant, as it's helped our security team. We can quickly categorize and try to weed out false positives in an ongoing process, especially in a large firm with many different emails going on every day.

My experience with centralizing our DLP program on Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has helped us weed out false positives and leverage that information to go back to the business, informing them on security awareness and how our security posture is being affected by team members misusing privileged information.

It's helping to improve our organization's security posture as we are on that journey, with ongoing in-flight projects here. 

Regarding saving time or money, we haven't really quantified in terms of money yet; we are still a little younger than full data categorization for security, however, I expect about 40% to 50% of our time was spent chasing false positives, especially among a certain class of users in the US versus some offshore counterparts.

I find the comprehensive coverage of our DLP, firewall, and endpoint solutions essential, which encompasses the whole SOC2 compliance process.

Improving Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention would involve recognizing that the whole AI path we are all on is going to help, given the massive amount of data we handle; even if there are true positives, implementing a degree of severity ranking is essential.

We do have to deal with a lot of false positives, particularly at the outset. 

I've been using the solution for as long as it's been around. 

I haven't had issues with stability.

I've seen no issues with scalability. 

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate my experience with support in the high seven to eight range, although there was a specific problem with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention regarding hashing that dropped this score due to communication issues with engineers. We went through a reseller and had issues. Once we got to the Microsoft engineers, the experience was great. The reseller being between us was nightmarish. Typically, support is very good. 

Positive

In my current organization, prior to adopting Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, we were using Microsoft DLP, which was one of the earlier solutions.

The learning curve is hard at first in terms of weeding out false positives and refining that process. AI will help with that. Rather than fine-tuning taking months, we're hoping it will get faster. 

I cannot quantify a return on investment specifically; however, for our security posture, I have seen some slight improvement in my teams' reports. From a pure financial perspective, I do not have that information.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing is not something I manage directly since I'm the owner operator; my colleagues might be more involved with that aspect as we have other teams to handle those details.

I'm committed to our current path.

I would assess the usability of authorized shares of sensitive information as a process still in the works. My hope is that we're doing great, and the expectation is high for future outcomes.

Currently, I do not utilize the machine learning for anomalies that is offered by Purview.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention a six out of ten. The amount of false positives and the hash issue we had have brought down the score for me.

I have good hands-on experience with Microsoft Defender, Azure Sentinel, Microsoft Admin portal, Azure portal, and the tools that XDR includes such as Microsoft Defender for EDR and O365. I use all of these tools daily.

I have good hands-on experience working with the Face API, which I used in the past six months. I do not use it every day because I work as a cybersecurity analyst.

Overall, I have been working with the Face API for some project work spanning eight to ten months.

I utilize the machine learning driven analysis offered by Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has helped to improve my organization's ability to discover sensitive data.

Classification and policy controls enhance productivity and user experience.

There are specific missing features that I would like to see included in Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention in the future.

I have been working with the Face API for more than two years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention as good.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention scales well with the growing needs of my organization.

I have escalated questions to technical support and would rate the technical support as a five on a scale of one to ten, where ten is the best.

Positive

The initial setup and deployment of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention was straightforward, but I faced some challenges and complexities during the process.

I use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for various main use cases and for data governance purposes.

The main disadvantages of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention in comparison to the Netscope product are notable considerations.

Classification and policy controls impact user productivity within the organization.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's ability to prevent unauthorized sharing of sensitive information is valuable.

The deployment experience with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention involved both positive aspects and challenges. The solution operates on a cloud-based, Azure-based DLP model.

I purchased Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention through Microsoft directly.

My experience with centralizing my DLP program in Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has been informative, and I can share advice and recommendations with other organizations considering this solution.

I recommend Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to other organizations considering a data loss prevention solution.

I am an end user of Microsoft products and work as a system analyst at Stratogent company.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention as a product and solution with a rating of ten on a scale of one to ten.

I prefer to use products under Microsoft Office 365. I tell my customers to use Microsoft products.

My customers do not use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention as they prefer to use Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention. My customers have used Microsoft Office 365, but they have not used its features. From next year, they might start using Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

I use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to protect information and endpoint or USB device controls. The tool is used for sensitive information protection on mobile devices and other settings.

The tool's most valuable feature is in the area of OCR. For my organization, Microsoft Purview compliance portal, Azure subscriptions and integrations were helpful. The document fingerprinting feature, information protection during integrations, and full cloud integrations are areas in which I am very experienced.

My customer wants the tool's OCR feature improved. The tool's user interface and document fingerprinting have been very poor for my customers because uploading files manually can be problematic.

The product's scalability is an area with certain shortcomings, making it an aspect where improvements are required.

I have been using Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for five years. I work as Microsoft's strategic partners in Istanbul, especially for Microsoft Office 365 products.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The tool offers medium scalability and not an advanced one. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a two out of ten.

Around 300 people are using the tool.

I have used the tool in large infrastructures over a period of three to four years.

My company's teams have communicated with the solution's technical support via emails. Based on my customer's experiences, I rate the technical support a five or six out of ten. The tool's support helped my company in areas like information protection, integration support, sensitive info types, custom keywords, and keyword dictionaries. The technical support experts that I communicated with were effective in resolving my issues.

Neutral

I have used Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, NetSense, McAfee, and Symantec. I started to use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention since I had to work with Microsoft in a collaborative manner.

When it comes to the product's initial setup phase, it is difficult, especially when it comes to the DLP endpoint onboarding of agents. There are some policies that are complex for some of my customers. With all the service integrations, you can work with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention in very complex architectures.

With the tool, creating policies is easy, but its settings may be difficult. If one is difficult, and ten is easy, I rate the tool's installation phase as a three out of ten. When it comes to e-commerce or credit card numbers, there can be some installation issues, which is a problem for my customers.

The solution is deployed using the cloud services offered by Microsoft Azure.

Our company deployed the solution for seven or nine projects, including PoCs and demos. A couple of hours were needed to deploy the tool.

The product's deployment phase involved the creation of policies and the onboarding of users.

The tool's deployment requires around four people, and its maintenance requires a minimum of ten people.

The tool was not very expensive. If one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the price as one out of ten.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has been effective in identifying and mitigating potential data leaks. Microsoft handles the XDR for the endpoints and helps prevent data leaks.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

We do implementations for Endpoint DLP and the cloud-based DLP. It can prevent the exfiltration of documentation, automate the classification of documents, and look for PII. We work on any sensitive information that customers don't want to leave the environment.

The tool decreases the risk of data leakage for the organizations that we've been implementing it for, both accidental and intentional.

The product can block the uploads to cloud services. The users can justify why they want to do it if they want us to allow it.

The Endpoint DLP engine has a lot of delays. The just-in-time protection feature does not always work as expected, mainly when working with network files in a more classic environment.

I've been implementing the solution for about a year and a half.

It's a fairly stable product. It requires a few more improvements.

The tool is easily scalable.

The support is poor. When it comes to DLP, the cases get tossed around a lot between Endpoint DLP and the cloud-based DLP. Sometimes, some information goes to the Microsoft Defender team. The cases get tossed around a lot.

Negative

We mostly used the built-in Exchange DLP in the past.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward. Our implementation strategy varies from customer to customer.

We have seen an ROI on the product because customers do not have to go to a third-party vendor to get the DLP functionality. A lot of customers already own the licensing port anyway.

The pricing is good. It is a good value because it is bundled with a lot of things that people buy already.

Proofpoint DLP has been assessed for a lot of customers. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention allows for a lot more integration into other areas within the Microsoft realm. Proofpoint doesn't really have that and the visibility and tie-ins into all the different areas.

It is important to me that Purview delivers data protection across multi-cloud and multi-platform environments. Otherwise, we would have to have multiple DLP solutions. It is very important to me that the solution was built taking into account critical regulations from around the world. It makes it easier to templatize deployments for data loss prevention.

I use the tool for data loss protection. The tool works fairly well in remediating policy violations. There could be a little bit of improvement in policy tips. Policy tips aren't consistent across different experiences.

The tool has greatly impacted the visibility of most of our customers. Some of our customers didn't realize they had a lot of PII data being sent externally until after the tool was implemented. Later, they become more aware.

The solution enables us to show our compliance as close to real-time as possible. It has affected our meetings with compliance regulators. We don't save time and money directly. The tool saves us time and money by saving on fines for regulatory compliance violations. Without the solution, one of our customers would have been fined about $2,500,000.

It is important to me that the product can connect to iOS, Mac, and Android devices, as well as data in other SaaS apps. It's not a complete solution unless it can be used everywhere. We are implementers. People evaluating the product must understand the types of data and the compliance models they must adhere to.

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

We can show our compliance in real time. The in-depth information helps to showcase to the auditor and the consultants the state, current threats, and risk alerts as well.

In addition, because of the automated alerting, it helps reduce the threat of insider attacks.

Other benefits include that Purview has helped us save time and helps us meet compliance requirements.

It's really important and very nice that Purview delivers data protection across multi-clouds and multi-platform environments. It's also definitely important for compatibility across the infrastructure that Purview can connect to iOS, Mac, and Android.

Out of 10, I would give Purview an eight for the data connector platform for supporting ingestion. And for Purview's natively integrated compliance across Azure, Dynamics 365, and Office 365, I would give it a 10 out of 10. It provides all the insights and information.

Purview's data loss protection for remediating policy violations gives quite in-depth information. Reviewing and assessing the information is definitely critical, so it's really helpful.

We also use Purview data loss prevention for macOS endpoints, and the fact that they have extended it to macOS is very important because most of our C-level and board members are using macOS. It's vital because they are sharing and accessing critical information.

Overall, it gives us quite good visibility of the estate and the data, so it's a very helpful product.

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

The stability of the solution is 10 out of 10.

Its scalability is a nine out of 10. The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options. It's not that big of a deal, and their documentation is really good. But some experience is required.

Still, it is suitable for both bigger and smaller companies.

I have not required any technical support yet.

The deployment was straightforward. It took seven days, approximately.

Our strategy was to identify the critical areas and information and, based on that identification, perform a gap assessment and implement the policies and processes.

We had two security analysts involved. There has been no maintenance required yet.

Because we just started using this, there is no ROI this year. Maybe we will see it in the next year.

The pricing is reasonable. We have a yearly subscription.

Our primary use case for Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is mainly for the categorization and classification of data into different classifications, ensuring privacy.

One of the most effective features is the excellent reporting tool that shows any potential breaches. 

Additionally, it can be used across multiple platforms, such as Office 365 and file servers, which is a significant advantage. 

Furthermore, the policy customization feature is very useful, and we have successfully used the auto policy configuration.

There isn't anything specific off the top of my head for improvements. However, more training for end users on how it works would be beneficial.

I have been using Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for six months.

We have had a couple of stability issues, such as an inability to change the classification of some documents due to an issue with Microsoft Purview on Office 365, but nothing significant.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is very scalable for our environment, and I would rate it ten out of ten for scalability.

The initial setup was very easy. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the ease of setup as eight out of ten.

It is quite expensive for us as the shift to E5 licenses represents a significant increase in cost. The cost works out to about $15 per user per month.

I recommend ensuring thorough testing and communication before rolling out Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention. I would rate the overall solution eight out of ten.

The solution is primarily used for preventing leaks - to protect us from getting information out of the company.

The data loss prevention is great. It can prevent things like credit card information from being taken. The data protection is excellent. 

We can use the solution on Windows and iOS. We mostly use it with Office 365 and ingest data sources from Microsoft.

The solution is natively integrated and compliant across Azure. It takes into account critical regulations from around the world. We need to comply with various regulations. For our business case, it's very important. 

If we can prevent information from going out, eventually, when a regulator is asking about our security measures, we can show what we've been doing. It helps us to reduce the likelihood of potential fines.

We can educate users on how to handle sensitive data. By showing the records we keep and explaining the technologies implemented, we can provide awareness to our users. 

The solution offers good visibility into our environment. Our security team can use the product to monitor and track.

Its dashboard allows us to show compliance in real-time.

We've been able to reduce the time to action on insider threats. Security permissions are always being monitored. In general, it has saved us time and money when dealing with security. It's made us become more efficient. We've increased our compliance capabilities by 25%.

It could cover more solutions and technologies.

One of the challenges that we're facing now is how we can identify our critical information storage level, for example, via scanning or some other method. 

While I'm no longer using the tool, I used the solution for two years. 

Support is good.

Positive

In the past, I've used Forcepoint. I used it at a different company. Purview is easier to use.

The deployment is pretty easy. As with any implementation, there may be some challenges. However, it wasn't overly complicated. It depends on the complexity of the business. 

We had a small team that handled the setup. It was specifically the networking team.

We rely on business partners to help with the technical part to reduce the impact on the business.

We have reduced ROI in terms of time and money saved. 

The pricing is a little bit better when compared to others on the market.

I'm unsure if my current company evaluated other options. 

We are Microsoft customers. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.