ARCON Privileged Access Management Reviews

Our primary use case is for using servers or accessing servers remotely, mostly for common users.

The most valuable feature is it is easy to use and the interface is intuitive.

Sometimes it gets stuck between servers and I would like to see this improved in the future.

I have been using ARCON Privileged Access Management for the past six months.

There is stability.

The scalability is good and we have around ten thousand users currently.

I did use technical support but I was disappointed.

I would recommend and rate ARCON Privileged Access Management a seven on a scale of one to ten.

We mainly use ARCON Privileged Access Management for managing the storage account password. Additionally, we maintain user activity logs from the server end to end.

By manually keeping the user logs, we can understand and manage all the operationalized tasks.

In terms of improvements, I suggest implementing password rotation for service-based accounts, as that should be included.

I have four years of experience using ARCON Privileged Access Management.

The solution has high stability. I would rate it nine out of ten.

When I have a script-related issue, I get delayed responses from technical support.

Positive

I previously used CyberArk. Due to issues with the industry, I switched to ARCON.

The initial setup was easy, as the project development is straightforward in ARCON.

The deployment was done by an integrator.

I don't have specific information on the ROI or pricing details. I have no involvement in pricing.

I did not evaluate other solutions.

I would recommend ARCON Privileged Access Management to others.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

One standout feature of ARCON is its ability to resolve lagging issues, especially noticeable in Linux environments. Beyond that, it matches up well in terms of capacity with other products, though some minor quirks may pop up, but those have been successfully addressed for the customers I have worked with. Additionally, ARCON's session monitoring and recording features are quite good.

A few areas for improvement in ARCON would be performance optimization, ensuring smoother management. Also, clarity on licensing mechanisms, particularly regarding user accounts, could use some improvement. It would be great if these details were readily available on the website for easy access and communication with customers.

I have been working with ARCON Privileged Access Management for six months.

My clients have not had any stability issues with ARCON.

When it comes to scalability, ARCON PAM is generally good. However, a bit more clarity on how the licensing handles additional privileged users would be beneficial.

My clients using ARCON PAM typically fall into the SMB category, with user numbers usually less than 500.

Clients have been drawn to ARCON Privileged Access Management mainly because of its competitive pricing compared to BeyondTrust.

In the environment I have worked with, a team of around 17 in the IT department manages ARCON. However, when it comes to handling the solution, two people are enough for smooth operation.

Based on my experience with ARCON PAM, I would give it a solid seven out of ten. In my six months of selling the product, I haven't received many complaints.

We primarily use it for managing our team's devices, such as remote desktops and Linux switches.

One of the main benefits we've experienced is that Arcon helps us manage all our team's tasks and provides recording capabilities. In addition, we also receive alert messages for the various features we use, which is quite helpful.

Some of the most valuable features include security measures such as password vaulting, as well as other features that help prevent big losses. The powerful vaulting feature is also quite useful.

Bulk password automation is not available in ARCON when compared to other products, and the cloud service is not intuitive for this behavior. For me, these could be some areas of improvement. 

We have been using ARCON Privileged Access Management for around two years. I am currently working with version 8.6. 

It is stable.

It is scalable. There are around 500 users who work with Arcon in my organization.

As of now, we have only escalated issues regarding password vaulting and sometimes there are problems with bulk password requests.

The customer service and support team is good. 

It was not easy or difficult; it was in the middle. It is deployed in a hybrid environment. The setup process may be on the same level as CyberArk.

We deployed it manually, not using automation. It is not difficult to maintain ARCON. It is easy to manage the solution. 

My recommendation is to onboard all the devices that we currently manage in our organization so that they can be accessed via PAM. I definitely recommend using the solution. Overall, I would rate ARCON Privileged Access Management a seven out of ten. 

We are using ARCON Privileged Access Management for entire data centers.

The most valuable feature of ARCON Privileged Access Management is the recording of sessions. It has all the basic features we need to fulfill our use case.

We receive automatic updates as part of our subscription.

There are some features lacking but they typically are added when the upgrades are released.

I have been using ARCON Privileged Access Management for many years.

We have approximately 100 people in my organization using this solution.

We have over 200 servers and storage systems using this solution. The solution is scalable.

We use third-party support.

The initial setup of ARCON Privileged Access Management is easy.

We have a subscription to use this solution.

We did an internal evaluation of many solutions, such as CyberArk and PAM, we selected ARCON Privileged Access Management as the best for our use case.

I rate ARCON Privileged Access Management an eight out of ten.

This solution is used by system administrators that need to access critical servers. They need to log in using this product, and it then logs their activities.

The only advantage this product has over competitors is the price. It's cheaper than competing solutions.

That dashboard is okay.

The password vaulting is robust.

This product has only a basic set of features. There is nothing really special about it.

The support services need to be improved.

The interface should be easier to use. One thing that would help is better documentation.

Managing users is difficult, so that is something that can be improved.

I have been working with ARCON Privileged Access Management for more than three years.

This product is relatively stable.

This is a highly scalable solution.

This product can be good in a small enterprise but when the environment is too big, it will be difficult to implement. It is only good for banks. For certain environments, it is very bad.

The support is very bad. This is an area that needs improvement.

I have experience with several similar products across different organizations. These include SIEM solutions, as well as Micro Focus ArcSight and IBM QRadar.

The initial setup is relatively easy. I would not say that it is overly easy or overly complex. However, the end-to-end implementation process is very complex. This is something that needs to be better.

The cost of this product is very cheap, comparatively in the global market.

Indian products are cheaper than American products, and they penetrate the market easily because of the price. There are no eye-catching activities or support. Rather, the advantage they gain is because of the price.

I would rate this solution a four out of ten.

Our company is involved in the health care sector and our primary use case of this solution is for compliance. Previously we used a system that included an Excel sheet but it would crash all the time because we have a large number of IT executives; tech related, application development and other administrators. We weren't able to receive the complete audit file that told us who was accessing and who was deleting what. It wasn't in compliance with data information security. For that reason we introduced the PAM solution and it's working extremely well. We're using it constantly on a daily basis. We are customers of ARCON and I'm a project manager. 

There are several valuable features in the solution. First, it's 100% compliant and you don't have to maintain ID management for each and every user. That's from the management perspective. From the technical aspect I would say that it completely meets our requirements. 

I think hazard flow could be improved, the data compliance part. We need to ensure that no data from any of our users is being accessed or compromised by any privileged user or a team member. There are some things on the database side which are missing and could be included. This is a web-based interface with multiple windows and you have to keep logging in. It should be that you can run any command in any window. It's really about the interface and navigating it.

I've been using this solution for over a year. 

The solution is very stable. I've read that it has been recommended by most of the financial institutions worldwide and I bet most of the companies in India, where I am, are promoting it.

This is absolutely scalable. We currently have 90 users out of 150 employees and we aim to increase that by the next quarter. It was delayed because of Covid. 

We contacted technical support once or twice in the implementation stage because there was an issue with the database team. The problem got solved and we were happy with that. 

We did a few POC, proof of concept. One was with Centrify and also with another solution. When our POC was done, it was clear that PAM was the best solution for us and I was happy with the result. We also heard from other companies that they were happy with this solution and word-of-mouth is also an important source. 

The initial setup was really simple but the database portion was a little more complicated and some of the features we had expected were not initially there. They were able to sort it out. Deployment was done in-house and expected to take two months but ended up taking four to five months until we were happy with it. It's a beautiful solution and we're much happier.

The pricing for this product is on the cheaper side. 

This is a very good enterprise solution and I would say that all enterprise companies should be using products like this. We're satisfied with the features and availability of this product.

I would rate this solution a 10 out of 10. 

I'll provide feedback on additional features after the project is completed. I think it would be better to comment on that after the implementation is finished.

I have been testing this solution for the past month. 

The deployment is not finished yet. To assess performance and stability, the project needs completion. Currently, our professional service is actively involved, managing tasks related to services and users in the ongoing termination process.

Currently, I'm in constant communication with them. They are professional, helpful, and highly experienced.

Positive

They need to simplify the implementation process. I've observed that sometimes the professional service is focused on the database, especially around log shipping, and it can be challenging.

I'm actively involved in the deployment process, but it's carried out by our professional service. Our plans are implemented through this service, acting as intermediaries between our clients and the professionals. The implementation typically takes around a month, but various issues, such as management, resources, and other challenges, may arise during the deployment.

One notable difficulty we face is the lack of exceptional resources for deploying the solution in our plans. Despite encountering challenges, our satisfaction with the professional service remains high. They are dedicated to implementing the solution effectively.

I'm uncertain about the licensing, specifically the pricing. This falls under the purview of other teams, particularly the sales teams. I am not informed about the pricing details.

I would rate it a ten out of ten overall. It's scalable and easy to deploy. However, I have some concerns. I noticed there are no instructional videos or guides on the network portal for initial configurations. There is limited information available, and this is a concern for me. I would like to see more resources and guides to address these issues.

Regrettably, this product remains incomplete, and the interim phase is still pending. It is challenging to determine its effectiveness due to some significant initial license issues.