Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (formerly Microsoft Defender ATP) is a holistic, cloud delivered endpoint security solution that includes risk-based vulnerability management and assessment, attack surface reduction, behavioral based and cloud-powered next generation protection, endpoint detection and response (EDR), automatic investigation and remediation, managed hunting services, rich APIs, and unified security management.
$2.50
per user/per month
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention
Score 7.1 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is used to provide intelligent detection and control of sensitive information across Office 365, OneDrive, SharePoint, Microsoft Teams, and on the endpoint. It also helps prevent data loss through identifying and preventing risky or inappropriate sharing, transfer, or use of sensitive data on endpoints, apps, and services.
We have not used anything else other than Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Maybe we've used other antivirus software like Sophos and things like that. They're just not all encompassing and that's why we moved to use this product.
I have been working with customers that they are transitioning from Sentinel One, CrowdStrike to Defender for Endpoint, right? So I think it's because they see the value in the product and also they see how much they can save in terms of the cost for companies because they …
We previously used CrowdStrike on our servers. However, the seamless integration of Microsoft Defender (MD) with XDR and the entire Microsoft ecosystem led us to choose Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (MDE).
What we love more about this product is the way this pro gets integrated into the other family of solutions, especially Defender for Identity or the XDR solutions. We think that the market, the customers are full of unattended consults coming out from different vendors and that …
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is more advantageous in our windows heavy infrastructure and it was unparalled in the ease of integration with windows endpoints. Security breaches, system crashes and outages with other competitors like Crowdstrike made it easier for us to go …
CrowdStrike Falcon is also a good solution for endpoint protection which offer EDR Soultion, threat hunting and AI driven threat protection. Sophos Intercept X combines next-gen antivirus with advanced EDR capabilities with its deep learning technology, exploit prevention, and …
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is unique for its effortless deployment into the Microsoft ecosystem, where it taps the broadest set of threat intelligence from more than 1.5 billion endpoints. Its state-of-the-art AI-powered automated investigation and remediation minimize …
We started onboarding macOS devices on jamf and started managing it. Because Defender for Endpoint is not working as expected for and compared to price and functionality we are switching from it.
CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. CrowdStrike, you have to deploy it, but it's the defender, it's already baked into the operating system. Same thing with SentinelOne.
I'm not familiar. It's just been one year plus that I started using, so I've just started using Defender, so I really don't know how to compare it with others.
I would say at the end all they are doing the same, but with the benefit that we don't need to install anything. So it's just kind of enabling and then the functionality is available, so other products need to be installed, which is not necessary with the defend
We use Defender in the cloud. We are currently using Defender in the cloud and also evaluating the XDR solution for programmatic. It's just arguments, the defense in depth. You have Defender Endpoint and then you have what you have in the cloud as well, so it's just augmenting …
Before using Defender for Endpoint, we basically had the starter version of the Microsoft product, which comes prebuilt into the system. We had them using in the initial run, but then what usually happened was the employees started disabling it, and that usually made, we guys …
I am a big fan of Tanium actually, so I think it is good. Tanium seemed like it was maybe a little bit easier, but maybe the capability was lacking. Maybe that's the reason why it seems like Defender for Endpoint might be a little harder to understand. There might just be more …
CrowdStrike Falcon, and Sentinel One are other big ones that we use a bit. Cisco Secure Endpoint we've evaluated as well. Cisco Secure endpoint capability-wise doesn't match up to Defender, SentinelOne, and CrowdStrike both do, but the cost profiles are a bit higher. So most of …
I would say not to name specific company names, because I'm a partner with one of them and that's the account that I work with. But I use some competing solutions that I would say are pretty heavy from an overhead perspective with the agent that has to be installed in the …
Varonis provided great visibility into file permissions and audit records. It did not provide DLP controls for things like email, and endpoints therefore making it incomplete to provide proactive controls against DLP threats.
Symantec or now? Brocom. Forcepoint, GPV. I'm trying to think of, there's a couple more. I can't think of the top of my head. I would say closer to the bottom then rather than the top. So because of the fact that yes, it integrates well. But in terms of the actual …
Not used any product other than Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention. As I mentioned in my earlier point that we did all the researches for the best suitable product for our environment, but Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention proved to be best and is working as per our …
There are much more comprehensive and granular DLP solutions out there like Trellix and Sophos but ultimately they are expensive and require significant administrative oversight for implementation and deployment. For a company of our size, they are just not economically …
The DLP in Exchange Online and Purview by proxy is okay, but fails to catch a lot of HIPAA-specific information. We supplemented with Barracuda to make up for it. Purview is still better at identification across the entire tenant though, Barracuda is just doing our email DLP.
The DLP was already part of our tenant so we saved money by using it. With others, we would have to built/implement VMs to connect to the tenant, which we were not willing do. Since we had access to it, we decided to stick with it and we are happy with that result
As the customer already had Microsoft Office 365 E5 license, it made sense to implement Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention instead of other products.
Because of its integration with Windows, it is very easy to deploy and manage. Any IT department should be able to leverage the software and interface. The admin portal provides weighted recommendations that comprise the Secure Store, offering admins, security teams, and business owners valuable insights into their security footprint without requiring a strong security background. The software would be ideal for small and mid-sized businesses that cannot dedicate resources to security. Larger enterprises would also benefit, but may require the enhanced license.
I would highly recommend Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention for companies that are utilizing Microsoft technologies based on the strong integrations. If a company is using other technologies (e.g Google Workspace), then Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention would not be a good fit and would be difficult to implement/manage.
One, it's crazy lightweight, so compared to some of the competitors that we also have used with our security services, it's really lightweight and so I don't have a lot of overhead on the system that it's running on.
It's a great product from an information protection perspective, as it can identify different types of data across tons of different locations.
It's great at applying standard regulatory frameworks, like HIPAA, to management actions so you can work towards being as compliant as possible.
The eDiscovery tools are very helpful when it comes to managing legal holds and discovery requests, as it's simple to freeze accounts or hold at points in time for discovery.
So the fact that Defender for Endpoint still works with signatures is actually, I don't know, a little difficult for us because, I mean, since Microsoft trusts those signatures, you can easily inject code. And we've done it many times. To show that you can inject code through vulnerabilities like CV 2013, 99, and 33 but still keep the signature. So because of the trust of those signatures, the malware just kind of slides into the environment without Defender knowing. That's the first part. The second part is that the behavioral analysis is not precisely its Prime. It's not Defender's best capability for endpoints. So, Defender does not identify all behaviors considered by other EDRs in the market.
Microsoft Defender is closely catching -up in market with existing competitors they have added DLP endpoint & DLP Network and Cloud DLP solution last year with OCR capabilities. I would say Microsoft Defender is not legacy Vendor in end point security, the need to learn from other vendors in market and focus on new XDR technologies, which is going to be new battle for all vendors
Because in terms of the usability is easy to understand, it's easy to manage, obviously you need to have specific skills to do that, but I would say that even the console and the product is walking through the flow that you are looking for on this console.
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint chugs along just fine no matter what we throw at it and what systems it's running on. It doesn't take up a lot of resources either, so that's welcomed.
Overall support is really good for this product. Since it's a Microsoft product, you will get good support from a number of different resources, including knowledgebase articles on the web, support from Microsoft technicians, and documentation (which tends to very thorough). Also, there is a vast user support community for this product, so user support forums would also be another valuable channel to get help if needed. I don't envision too many people will have issues/problems with the product, as it tends to run good overall.
Deployment was handled by our team here and everything went pretty smoothly. We did have a few hiccups in our test group, but that only took a bit to get ironed out.
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers strong integration with Microsoft 365 and Azure services, which provide a unified security experience. While McAfee Trellix is known for solid antivirus, Microsoft Defender excels in integration in the ecosystem.
Symantec or now? Brocom. Forcepoint, GPV. I'm trying to think of, there's a couple more. I can't think of the top of my head. I would say closer to the bottom then rather than the top. So because of the fact that yes, it integrates well. But in terms of the actual functionality of DLP, there are other requirements that they just don't have the features for yet.
I think it's integral to everything, it has to be positive and the positivity has to be the ability to use Purview in a situation for an organization. For us as a provider, we're not sure if we need your services or we think we're doing this thing correctly. We also evaluate compliance team. So first thing that we may do is if we don't have a footprint in the organization and we don't know what their data parameter or their data flow capabilities are, if we don't think that they're controlling it confidently, we validate and verify. We may do a content search and that content search immediately will be the most revealing thing. They'll be like, "alright, so right here on this diagram, this and this area are the areas that you have protected that are capable of protecting CUI. How come your CUIs in all of these 18 other different areas in which you see as like scope creep happens because the enforcement mechanisms haven't been tested, validated or whatever, or haven't been effective." It allows us to do quick cleanup, quick discovery, and things like that for new onboarding clients.
