Index › Vendors › OpenDLP · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

OpenDLP

10Judge labels

0First choices

7Negative labels

8 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

9 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. OpenDLP was named 9 times in DLP, where Microsoft Purview DLP led with 39%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business50 of 68

under the label threshold

Mid-market82 of 84

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In dlp · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named OpenDLP for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Data loss prevention	Security operations	0%	82 of 84	67%	9	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview DLP at 39%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for OpenDLP yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated OpenDLP across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	2	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1	2
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained7 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“OpenDLP: Free, agent- and agentless-based; scans Windows, UNIX, MySQL, and MSSQL for sensitive data at rest.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · DLP · budget prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“OpenDLP and MyDLP: both are described as outdated in the comparison table, which is a red flag” Perplexity Sonar · DLP · negative prompt · hard negative

“Open-source tools require significant setup and maintenance time, which may offset cost savings.” Kimi K2 · DLP · budget prompt · soft negative

“it lacks cloud-native integrations, AI classification, and advanced insider risk features” Claude Haiku 4.5 · DLP · budget prompt · soft negative

“free, open-source, agent-based DLP for scanning data at rest (though it's aging/dated)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DLP · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as OpenDLP, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OpenDLP was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Purview DLP7 of 105Not in the top three

MyDLP7 of 100Not in the top three

CurrentWare6 of 102Not in the top three

Safetica6 of 100Not in the top three

Netwrix Endpoint Protector5 of 100Not in the top three

Nightfall AI4 of 101Not in the top three

Symantec Data Loss Prevention4 of 100Not in the top three

Box Shield2 of 100Not in the top three

Forcepoint DLP2 of 100Not in the top three

TruffleHog / Gitleaks2 of 100Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named OpenDLP. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 9 of the 10 answers that named OpenDLP and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com8

currentware.com7

learn.g2.com6

aimultiple.com5

g2.com5

kitecyber.com5

forcepoint.com4

kickidler.com4

underdefense.com4

comparitech.com3

No domain is on file for OpenDLP, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/data-loss-prevention8

currentware.com/blog/best-data-loss-prevention-software7

learn.g2.com/best-data-loss-prevention-software6

kitecyber.com/best-dlp-solutions-vendors5

aimultiple.com/open-source-dlp-software4

forcepoint.com/blog/insights/best-dlp-software4

kickidler.com/reviews/top-best-data-loss-prevention-software-dlp.html4

underdefense.com/blog/dlp-solutions4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when OpenDLP's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as OpenDLP, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at the vendor's own domain is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.