DASB Vs. DLP: Operational Overhead

There is a very distinct and clear difference between traditional DLP and SecureCircle Data Access Security Broker (DASB). Below is a list of additional resources:

Today, I will focus on the operational overhead.  Maintaining traditional DLP rules and understanding a 2500+ page Symantec DLP administration manual is an impossible task.  Setting up rules for every application, workflow, and use case is hopeless.  Misconfigure a set of rules or forgetting to update existing rules when classifications change and data is lost.  Fines, penalties, and news headlines ensue.   IT and security teams will fruitlessly try to keep rules updated with traditional DLP.

Since SecureCircle architected DASB to be transparent to end-users and not require any changes to workflow or applications, the ongoing operational overhead is minimal.

DASB implements an opt-out, all data protected by default posture.  IT teams can create policies to allow for the egress of protected data to align with business needs.  A couple of examples:

  • Using Filezilla to FTP sensitive documents to the data owner can be set up as an application and network policy.  
  • Authorized users have permission to release files from protection such as a Sales Account Manager that needs to send proposals, project plans, and design files to customers.  

SecureCircle logs all actions for audit and compliance. Standard daily business workflow can manage itself without the need for IT to micromanage every step.

By deploying an opt-out, protect by default solution, organizations can reduce the amount of time spent on maintaining DLP solutions and reduce data breaches caused by incomplete, insufficient, outdated, or conflicting policy rules.  SecureCircle's DASB prevents data breaches and insider threats.

DASB Vs. DLP: Operational Overhead