What is our primary use case?
We're using it as a vaulting solution. We're doing password vaulting, and we're doing password rotations. We also do session management and session proxies.
We probably are using version 7.2.
How has it helped my organization?
From a management and audit perspective, we've seen a lot of improvement because now, we're secure in the sense that we know where that access is coming from, and we know who is requesting the access. From that perspective, we're very happy, and it has provided a lot of value, but from a user perspective, it has been negative. When we talk to our frontline guys, who actually use this solution, they're not too happy with the whole solution itself only because they feel that it has added a step in their whole process and procedures.
We use PuTTY, and we didn't find it very difficult to integrate session management into existing business processes. It was pretty good. It all comes back to how you would define the users and how you define the administrative access. If sudo and those types of things are kept out of the picture, then by getting access to a privileged role or group or SSHing into a session with the root privileges, they're able to do everything they need to do without having to go through the virtual model of sudo to access something. The seamlessness was that they didn't have to go and make that connection happen. It was just all integrated within the solution itself. They just click on the asset that they wanted access to, and it would provide SSH access to that system.
So far, we have been able to integrate session management without disrupting business processes, at least for the assets that we've been on. That's very important to us. The main feature is the session recording. If we can continue to have session management, and we get those session recordings, that's the key for our auditing team.
What is most valuable?
The vaulting features are valuable.
It provides integrated password and session management in one solution, which is important for us because, from an auditing standpoint, we are accountable for the type of access being used. We need to ensure that accounts are securely stored and there is the right type of accountability around who is gaining the access. After gaining it, how they're using it, where they're using it, etc.
What needs improvement?
In terms of intuitiveness, the UI for a generic user is good. I wouldn't call it great because, at times, some of the capabilities are difficult. While trying to get to the password itself or trying to find the asset itself, it sometimes gets difficult to narrow down or identify which asset you can get credentials for. There were some search features and the ability to have a favorite, but in a lot of cases for our user community, it wasn't very useful.
The RDP access needs to be improved. I wasn't very keen on that. It downloads an RDP file every time you want to access the solution. It builds up these sessions on your laptop. That was one of the pain points that a few of our administrators had talked about.
Named accounts don't work well in this solution. If you use named accounts for your administrative access, the way Smart Rules work is that it takes your SAM account name and matches it to the account name of your privileged ID, which creates limitations on size and how big those names can be because the directory has a 20-character limit.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using BeyondTrust since 2018. So, it has been about four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is very stable. It is good. We haven't had any major incidents with the product.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is good. It is very easy to add new VMs to the solution and integrate them with the existing hardware. Scalability is very easy.
To date, if I remember correctly, we have 200 users as administrators using the solution today, and they are the domain admins from a Windows perspective and the root access administrators on a Linux box.
Its usage is not as extensive as the organization first hoped. They are not planning to make it any larger than it is today.
How are customer service and support?
I didn't like it at all, but that was about two years ago. I'm not on the site anymore. I was the architect, and during the time of implementation, there were things on which our developers had more input than the BeyondTrust team. I would rate them a five out of ten.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
In the organization I'm in, we had CyberArk previously. We made the switch because there was an initiative to improve our stance on privileged access management, and the CyberArk solution that was deployed wasn't kept up to date. It was outdated and needed to be upgraded.
It was a real competition between CyberArk and BeyondTrust, and the company eventually chose to use BeyondTrust. Between CyberArk and BeyondTrust, there were no real big differences at the time. Both of them achieved whatever goals that we wanted, but it was really a cost factor. BeyondTrust was significantly cheaper than CyberArk at the time.
How was the initial setup?
We didn't deploy in the cloud. We deployed on-prem. It was a VM image that they provided to us. It was a huge factor that it was so quick to deploy, and they gave us that VM image. We went into VMware and created a space where we could deploy that image, and it was ready to go.
The initial setup was pretty straightforward. We needed their help a little bit, but for the most part, it was pretty straightforward. Their documentation was good at guiding us through. It mainly had the configure/next type of screens. So, it was a lot easier to implement and deploy.
In terms of duration, the server build wasn't very long. It took us a few weeks up to a month at the max. However, the actual implementation of getting the accounts in, identifying privileged accounts, and getting all those things sorted took roughly about a year and a half.
We didn't have to go through the migration strategy. So, it didn't apply to us. We have gone through an upgrade process with Password Safe. It was much more difficult than the actual setup. It wasn't as easy as we thought it would be. There were a lot of components. For example, the database required special scripts to be run against it. That was more complex than we'd like. As per my Ops teams, the biggest issue was some of the coordination with database teams because when the upgrades happened, there were some schema changes or custom changes on the database that had to be implemented. Coordinating these changes was a bit difficult, but application-wise, the solution itself wasn't very hard to upgrade.
What about the implementation team?
We used BeyondTrust and Optiv. Our experience was interesting because midway through, the BeyondTrust resource that we had either left or was let go, but we had continuity after that. Depending on who you talked to, it was mixed in terms of engagement.
For maintenance, we have a centralized identity management group that manages a solution, and then we have a database group that helps. Altogether, there are roughly about five resources to keep the solution up and running.
What was our ROI?
You see the value in it based on your data leakage and your ability to secure privileged access to the systems. I don't know if you see a real value right off the bat, but the biggest value you'll see is on your auditing side. After a year, during the audit, the audit team will see its benefits.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
At the time, BeyondTrust was significantly cheaper than CyberArk. Pricing-wise, if I remember correctly, it goes by assets. The pricing was negotiated for our instances based on the number of assets that we onboard into the system. It is a little different from CyberArk, where the pricing is by users. So, it depends. If you have a lot of assets, it can get very expensive.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We also evaluated the CA solution. The reason why the CA solution was immediately taken off the shelf was that a client was required on every desktop. That was one of the main reasons why the organization didn't want to go with that solution.
What other advice do I have?
The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is that named accounts don't work well in this solution.
My advice would be to really understand your use cases. If you have use cases that are specifically for named access where your privileged access is not shared but it is named to specific users, then you might want to look at their Smart Rules capability and what it can do. If you're using a shared pool of administrative access and you're reusing privilege access from that shared pool, the solution beats everyone out there, hands down.
We haven't used the Team Passwords feature to securely store credentials owned by small groups outside of traditional privileged user roles. It came up afterward, and we haven't yet implemented it here. We also didn't try to customize anything because we try to go out of the box as much as possible.
I'd rate it an eight out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.