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.
N/A
Zscaler Internet Access
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Zscaler Internet Access™ (ZIA) is a secure web gateway (SWG), delivering cloud native cyberthreat protection and zero trust access to the internet and SaaS apps.
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.
Netskope was good however did not have all the features Zscaler had. Zscaler provides the same type of protection as Netskope but more. We also found the netskope agent used a lot of resoures on devices. ZCC was very light-weight and did not consume a lot of resources on laptops.
Palo support has been a large enough negative experience on multiple occasions that we have been looking to move away from the platform and Zscaler Internet Access looks to be a suitable replacement
Zscaler Internet Access is most akin to ZPA - we bought both at the same time to handle all traffic internally and externally. In terms of quality - I would make the statement that Zscaler Internet Access is a simpler product but that's also cause there are no App Connectors …
Zscaler Internet Access has significantly more configurability and capability in the platform, and can scale much better with large organizations. It is also much more affordable for our environment and gives us greater flexibility to grow into the Zscaler Platform.
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.
Zscaler Internet Access has extremely powerful category selection and it is very easy to create your own destinations for inspection and policy exceptions (SSL exception specifically). It is also very affordable and just as powerful (if not more) than some of the other solutions I have used in the past to achieve internet security.
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.
The depth that Cloud App control policies can go into. Being able to control individual actions within an application, more than just all or nothing access.
The UX/UI design makes it really easy to navigate the portal.
Understanding how cloud app/url control policy gets evaluated and creating/editing existing policy is extremely straightforward.
While Zscaler Internet Access (ZIA) delivers critical value in cloud security and RBI compliance, I rate renewal likelihood 7/10 due to evolving needs versus platform limitations. Below is my rationale:
The application is easy to install and configure on all Windows devices. To troubleshoot any internet issue, we can easily collect all the relevant logs from Zscaler and check the exact issue. The only problem is with the uninstall, as a dedicated crew needs to provide the password.
Zscaler's ZIA support is quick and knowledgable. They respond within 1-2 hours of you submitting your ticket. They are very thorough and are typically ready to jump on a live troubleshooting session. Our ZIA platform and how we use is it unique so at times tickets can be open for weeks but we alway get quality support compared to other unrelated product support in our enterprise
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.
Zscaler Internet Access is most akin to ZPA - we bought both at the same time to handle all traffic internally and externally. In terms of quality - I would make the statement that Zscaler Internet Access is a simpler product but that's also cause there are no App Connectors involved in that process.
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.
Has allowed us to remove other products that were suboptimal
Saved us money overall by stacking it with other Zscaler products
Created a more secure work environment for our users through intelligent internet policies that are not needlessly restrictive while still maintaining security best practices
