Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Reviews

We use the product to set up policies. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is stable. 

The tool's scalability is great. 

We have dealt with Unified and Premier support. Whenever I raise a ticket, I start researching the answer as well. 

The tool's implementation is easy. 

We have seen ROI with the product's use. 

I have Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention on Mac, but I do not use it daily. 

We use GCP, and it is good that the product can expand to it. 

It is good that the product goes automatically into the sensitivity limits of a country. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention saves time in the implementation area.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.  

We use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for the entire life cycle and not just DLP. That is, we use it for discovery, classification, and DLP.

Earlier, our customers had no control at all over compliance, and confidential documents that were going out were not at all looked into. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has been a huge benefit to our clients in this regard.

I like the whole value proposition of Microsoft Purview, particularly the DLP and integration with external solutions.

Purview's natively integrated compliance across Azure, Dynamics 365, and Office 365 is important to us because it's all about compliance.

Organizations have various compliance policies including the regulatory policies that are defined within the organization and those for a particular region. Therefore, it is important to our organization that Purview is built taking into account critical regulations from around the world.

This solution enables our clients to show compliance in real time and has helped them in their meetings with compliance regulators.

Purview Data Loss Prevention provides presentations to educate users on how best to handle sensitive data. When the user doesn't know whether a document should be classified under a certain label, Purview will provide suggestions or will auto-classify the particular document. It has automatic labeling capabilities.

It's important that Purview provides data protection for iOS, Android, and data in other SaaS apps because our customers have heterogeneous environments. Purview perfectly fits into the heterogeneous space.

Purview has reduced the number of solutions needed to interact with each other and has coexisted with them. Some customers have completely replaced their solutions with Purview, and others have Purview for classification labeling and a third-party solution for the DLP verdict.

It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated.

I would like Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to be on the source code or SQL databases. It is difficult to do classification and labeling when you have a third-party source code or a third-party Oracle database. It is seamless when it comes to Microsoft documents but is not so with third-party source codes. Microsoft needs to work on it a little bit more.

Everybody wants information protection, but not all of them can afford the M365 license. I would like Purview to be a standalone product or solution.

We've been working with this solution for the past three years.

It is definitely stable.

Our clients are medium to large organizations, and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has to be a scalable solution for them.

Overall, Microsoft's technical support is good, and I would give them a rating of six out of ten.

Neutral

The initial deployment is straightforward. We can quickly configure the policies, but the classification and labeling take time.

The solution does require monitoring.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is part of a bundle and is not sold as a standalone product.

I recommend Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention and rate it at nine on a scale from one to ten.

With this product, you can protect your data from getting out of the company, or falling in the wrong hands. You protect your data leakages. It's a very huge subject. It's very important.

The main part I like about it is, that quite a few of the DLP features are built into the latest server operating systems. The reliability of these is good and there's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems. They work well. 

The setup is straightforward. 

VM people say you cannot use just one product; you need multiple products across the network and you have to deploy to the backups.

The DLP could always be better.

Overall, they should make their Hyper-V and the clustering more stable. VMware offers very good clustering, for example. Microsoft needs to improve a lot in terms of stability.

Technical support is awful.

I've used the solution for almost 10 years.

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

The solution has been very scalable. 

As an integrator, we don't have a single client. We have so many clients. The average number of users can be as low as 100 and can go as higher 1,000. It varies. Not everyone implements DLP. A basic level of DLP is implemented, however, it is a very niche implementation and DLP is done only if someone has to be compliant. For example, a company might need either an SSA 2018 certification or SOC 1 Type 2 certifications. 

You can troubleshoot easily via documentation, which is readily available. 

Technical support seriously needs work. They are not helpful at all.

Microsoft has kind of become a monopoly now and there are so many users. They are more interested in selling the products. They're not interested in supporting them. Unlike the other companies who have at least a ticket system, here, when you are a monopolistic company, you don't care. You know the products will sell, and people will buy them.

Negative

You have the full encryption file and folder, however, for that, we use a different product. We don't use Microsoft. BitLocker has given us encryption features, however, we don't use that. Mostly, we prefer McAfee for that.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. I see a lot of improvement on the installation part when compared to earlier days when it was a little bit tough. Right now, the documentation is good and implementation is not taking that much time. You're up and running quickly. The final aspects might require additional time, however, 80% of it you finish pretty fast. 20% of the time is when you want to fine-tune, depending on your site requirements There it might require an extra effort.

There are some products that are available on a subscription basis. Predominantly, what I use is the one that comes with the operating system and I use other third-party products basically to cover anything that's missing.

We are an integrator as well for Microsoft DLP.

Our deployments are mostly on-premise or private cloud, not on the public cloud.

Overall, I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The product has improved compliance and confidence. We are aware of the data that is leaving our organization. It provides confidence in data management and information storage. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention ensures users don't accidentally send inappropriate information outside. 

The AI advancements can improve the false positives. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

We use Premier support. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's deployment concepts are straightforward. Documentation is also available. 

I am satisfied with the tool's pricing. 

We consider user parity and user experience across all devices. 

My company is in the SMB domain, so we do not require multi-cloud features. 

Our primary concern is North American regulations, but the tool's compliance with international regulations like GDPR is also helpful. 

I rate it a seven out of ten. 

We use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to prevent data loss on our devices.

We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies.

The platform can be challenging to navigate and has the potential for improvement. For instance, we encountered an email in our environment that needed to be deleted from all user mailboxes. This process required us to involve multiple security administrators. It would have been easier if we could highlight the email after completing the email trace and have the option to add or soft delete it, rather than having to go to the Action Center.

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

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is stable and meets Microsoft’s SLA.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention can scale effectively as long as there is space available for additional licenses.

I give Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention a seven out of ten.

We currently have 160 users.

I recommend Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention.

We basically use it to track personal identifiable information. We are also using it to label any confidential, company trade secret, and internal data. We have an internal use policy and a confidential use policy to encrypt the documents.

The auto-labeling feature is definitely the most valuable feature. It goes in and labels the documents for you in different repositories. It covers the Outlook and Exchange repositories along with SharePoint and OneDrive. It is really helpful in those areas.

There is a lot of ambiguity when you are setting up labels, such as sensitive information labels. It is a little daunting at first if you don't have prior knowledge, and there is a little bit of a learning curve for setting up the labels.

Some of the setup wizards could be more helpful from an AI perspective. They can streamline the setup through more AI technologies so that you don't have to jump through so many hoops and different menus and dropdowns. It would be useful to have a setup wizard that is more hands-off and engaging for setting up the information type labels. If you tell them this is what we're trying to protect, it should basically start to lead you down that path of best practices. Such a feature would be great.

It is absolutely stable. A part of the success criteria was to not have any stability issues. It seems very responsive after you get through the deployment aspect of it.

We have been adding more label information types, and it seems to scale well. I don't see any issues there. This part of the solution is built into the Microsoft Cloud ecosystem. Therefore, you don't really have any sort of quota or cap on your data. It seems to be going really well on that front.

Currently, we have about 600 users. We're going to continue on this Microsoft journey. There is another feature that we're looking at called the Purview feature, which is basically adding the same sensitive info type tagging for data in your Microsoft SQL databases. We are currently looking at using that.

Their technical support is excellent. We've had some hiccups here and there regarding the setup. We contacted Microsoft, and they were very quick to respond with solutions. The online Microsoft documentation is also kept fairly up to date, which has been another plus. Its documentation is really well done.

It was fairly complex because it has a very wide and broad gamut of sensitive info types. Each of the labels and sensitive input types that we created took four to six hours of initial setup and work. The deployment itself is pretty instantaneous, but getting the data back and actually seeing the labels and sensitive info types come back in the form of data tagging definitely takes some time. Depending on the size of your repository, it can take longer to scan the data and label it while going through all the algorithms. It probably took a good two to three days to actually see some meaningful data.

It is a part of our Microsoft licensing. We pay for a yearly renewal. Its price is reasonable for the size of the organization we are. It is fairly competitive, and you get what you pay for. We have an E5 license, and a part of understanding the E5 license is to see what all you get with it. If you really look at it from that standpoint, you get a lot of value. You have Defender and all its security features in there as well.

Their licensing is fairly flexible. They have different programs. We've seen ones where you could pay for up to three to five years in advance. There is also a monthly pay-as-you-go type of deal, but we're doing a yearly renewal and fixing the budget.

We didn't evaluate any other product because it was just way too convenient. It is a part of our Microsoft licensing, so we were already paying for it. There wasn't anything appealing to try a third-party solution or anything like that.

I would advise others to definitely go to the documentation first and plan ahead. It is definitely something you plan, and it definitely requires a kind of a crawl-walk-run approach, so you definitely want to plan for it. I would also suggest taking advantage of the testing and reporting features that are available to be able to do a pilot and test it before you actually deploy it.

I would rate Microsoft Endpoint DLP a nine out of ten. There is a little area for improvement, but it is definitely the best in class.

I am working on Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for multiple locations like SharePoint, OneDrive, device level, and exchange level. We also use it for on-premises and cloud applications, including Power BI. We have implemented it in multiple locations with different conditions and actions.

I like the sensitivity labels and data security posture management for AI. Insider risk management and data retention are also beneficial. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention usually performs well, except for endpoint Data Loss Prevention, which may need improvements.

Endpoint Data Loss Prevention needs to be improved as it is not up to expectations. Auto labeling and Data Loss Prevention (DLP) for devices need improvement as well.

I have been working with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for one and a half years.

Sometimes the solution is not stable when the internal connection is not reliable, so this aspect needs improvement.

For Microsoft ecosystem, scalability is good. However, for device level, it needs improvement. Onboarding is fine, however, the policy working and detection technology need enhancements.

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is cloud-based and does not require traditional installation. Maintenance is minimal.

I rate the overall solution 3 out of 10.