BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access Reviews

It is used for server access. I am using the latest version. Initially, I started with 10.6, and now, I am on the latest version.

It is currently on-premises, and down the line, we will be moving to the cloud. As of now, we have physical appliances for PRA. We do have plans to move the cloud. We've added two more servers at our end, and they will be moved to the cloud. 

Our client was using a different product, and they were not able to manage some critical parts. So, they started looking for a replacement, and they found BeyondTrust. As soon as they brought in this product, it was a very easy configuration. Implementing this product was very easy. It doesn't require much. It is very simple, and we can implement it in a week or two, which is what I like about BeyondTrust. It takes much longer to bring in other products. It is also very easy to bring privileged accounts into the product. It is much easier to do management and operational tasks as compared to other solutions.

It is very simple. You just open the URL, and you'll be able to see all your servers. Previously, it was a very tough task. There was either direct access or a VPN. There were a lot of restrictions for connecting to the VPN. There were also some other restrictions to access other products, such as if they want to go for SSO and other things. BeyondTrust is very easy. The users can open a URL, and they will be able to see all their servers. It is very easy for the users, and we are getting very good feedback from the users as well. Previously, there were multiple steps to connect, and now, there is only one step to connect to the servers remotely.

It is a very secure product, which is very important for us. For example, there are 5 to 10 users of an application, and everybody has access to a different machine. With this product, we can easily do segregation of duties and segregation of the server connectivity. Everybody is able to see the servers, but only those people who have access will be able to log into a server with a single click. It is a great tool, and everything has improved over here. Until now, we haven't faced any issues with this product. It is very simple and secure.

We use the vault for service account management. All the passwords and all the credentials get vaulted. In the PRA console, users can select the correct credential and log in. They don't have to know or see the actual password. Whenever a privileged account is managed by a PAM solution, there is a connector between the PRA solution and the PAM solution. This connector gets the credentials and injects them without any manual intervention. Other solutions also have this feature, but in BeyondTrust, it is very simple and different. The connector does all the work in the background.

It does good discovery. When we are trying to pull the local accounts, every local account is visible in the scanned report, and we can easily identify that this is a local account. We'll also be able to get a list of the domain accounts parallelly. There is a clear set of data indicating whether an account is a domain account or a local account. For cross verification, we also check with the application team whether these accounts are domain accounts or local accounts. The scanner works very well for us.

We can bring all kinds of accounts into the solution. Most products target privileged accounts or the accounts with privileged access. With this product, you can segregate a privileged account, a local account, and a normal account or a user account with the least privilege. All these accounts can be brought into the solution.

Through the use of PRA, there is no need to share passwords with users. There is no password sharing. Everything is vaulted. There are two types of integration in PRA. One is with the privileged accounts that are already managed by the PAM solution. The other one is with the least privileged accounts, such as a local account or a test account. Those accounts will be managed by the end-users. If I have the access to the privileged account, my password will be injected from the other solution by using the connector from PAM to PRA. If I have a local account on a test server or a development environment, the connection will be initiated from the PRA solution, and it'll be encrypted and monitored. All other features will also be there. I only have to key in the password.

We use the solution to provide access to third-party vendors. We can't create an AD account or some other account for the vendors in my organization because of some security and violation concerns. With the PRA solution, it is very easy. I can just add or create an account, and I can map this account only for the PRA solution. Whenever they log in, all the sessions are recorded. In case of any violation or issue, I have the recorded session. I can go and check what happened to the server. This way, it helps the vendors a lot, and a vendor doesn't need my intervention whenever they want to log in, even if he is in a different timezone. Previously, I had to be available for the session. I used to share the session via some other third-party platform, such as Teams or Skype, and my availability was very important. If I close the session, the session would get closed for them too.

It offers SSO authentication. We have multi-factor authentication, and we have RADIUS and other authentications. Multi-factor authentication is mandatory across any application or any URL.

In terms of session auditing and monitoring of third-party and remote work access, I have worked with another solution that was only for privileged accounts or privileged servers. PRA can be used for both privileged accounts and non-privileged accounts in the development environment. All transactions or accesses get checked and recorded. So, it is very easy for an administrator to manage the solution across the organization.

When it comes to the Privileged Remote Access (PRA) solution, instead of depending on a VPN client, from Cisco or any other vendor, we can directly use this product from the internet. It is very easy to do the implementation, and it is easy for every user to access the server from outside of their organization. They can open the URL and put their name and password, and it'll do the multi-factor authentication. They can easily access the server. Prior to this solution, the users had to log into the VPN, which is not required with BeyondTrust. Now, they can use their computer over the internet. In Privileged Access Management (PAM), the AD bridging feature where you can bring all your Linux boxes into the tool is an important feature.

I have been using this solution for close to three years.

Its stability is good.

Its scalability is very good. It makes things easier for the end-users.

I am an administrator of the PRA here. All the users in my organization are using this. There are more than 900 users, and there are some 4,000 or 5,000 servers. It is being used on a daily basis. We are in the process of increasing its usage.

Their support is very good. As soon as we log a case, their support engineers respond and help us out. The response time depends on the severity of the case. For a severity C case, they get back in a day or two. For a severity B case, they get back within 24 hours, and for severity A case, they get back immediately. They respond and resolve the issue within defined SLAs. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have worked on another solution previously, which is a market leader. I wanted to get into a product that was booming in the market. I was very focused on this solution because I knew this is going to be a market leader in the coming days. I was going through some articles on the internet, and suddenly, I got the opportunity in my company to work with BeyondTrust. I was very happy to get into this. It is working very well.

I was not a part of the complete deployment. When I joined this organization, deployment was already done. Some fine-tuning was happening, and I was part of that. It took about two weeks to fine-tune it based on the requirements, and that's all.

Overall, its setup is very simple. It would take us a week or two to bring other solutions into the organization, but we can bring in this solution within a week. We can easily bring 10 to 20 servers into the product.

For its implementation, probably there was someone who helped us remotely.

I have got a very good impression of BeyondTrust. It is a very good and booming product across the globe. I have been using this solution for close to three years, and I am still learning about its full capability. There is a lot to be explored.

They provide a lot of updates, and I am able to see a lot of fine-tuning happening. We can bring our own tool, and if we have an RDP tool, that can also be integrated. They are adding many features related to reporting, connectivity, and stabilization of connectivity. They are improving their product in every aspect.

BeyondTrust has many products such as PAM and PRA. AD bridging is also there. Specifically, with the PRA, you can ignore VPN. You don't have to pay for a license for the VPN. You can use this product.

All servers, with privileged activities as well as those without privileged activities, are assets of the organization. They all also should be monitored and should be in the control of the organization. PRA is helpful there because you can also onboard the least privileged servers. This helps a lot because everything is recorded and monitored. The management will have a crystal clear report about who accessed them and for what. Everything will be very clear.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. It makes the life of end-users easier.

Initially, we had a different VPN set up for our external vendors, and working for a pharmaceutical company, we had a lot of equipment vendors telecommuting in to do maintenance on the equipment. Using BeyondTrust PRA streamlined this process; it made it easy for us to manage and distribute the proper certificates and assign privileges to all external users. If one of the remote parties got a new employee, we would set up an access account using their name, providing the same permissions as their coworkers to manage parts of our infrastructure. This was an excellent addition to our company and alleviated a lot of pressure from our support staff.

We signed a contract with a new IT management firm that took over our IT support. That's 300 new employees that needed access to the right groups, et cetera. It took just one day to create the 300 accounts and assign them to the proper teams. PRA streamlines the onboarding process, even for large groups of new remote helpers, setting up the correct templates, having the Discovery in place, and assigning and revoking access.

We like the integration with Active Directory. It allows us to discover the endpoints and user accounts that need protection. It's a good way of securing our privileged access.

Another feature I like is the approach to jump points. Jump points are the external-facing proxies, which use the same outbound HTTPS connection method as the jump client but allow the initiation of RDP connections, et cetera, into the downstream networks. This feature was the key selling point for us in choosing BeyondTrust PRA. 

The security provided by the solution regarding remote and privileged access is about as good as we can get without completely locking down permissions. Going with PRA is the best step if a client is looking to lock down administrative access with a remote solution while applying the principle of least privilege. 

We used the solution's Vault to add not just service accounts but also the users' main administrative accounts discovered through Active Directory. We limited permissions, so users couldn't even review their account passwords. This was managed in the Vault and injected into each session. 

Compared to other products, PRA is one of the better ones. We need to start the discovery manually, but it's comprehensive and clear. It allows us to select what to import and has the automation behind it to manage endpoints and accounts, which is a valuable feature for any enterprise business.

The physical solution wasn't as important to us; our architecture strategy was SaaS first, virtual later. If BeyondTrust didn't have a SaaS offering, we would look at availability to install it in one of the public cloud offerings on the market. Having the SaaS option available, especially for medium-sized businesses, is very much something that gives BeyondTrust an edge in the market. 

The solution improved our network security. Especially regarding remote vendors, it allowed us to complete our network segregation goals. We could close down all external access to that network and leverage PRA as the single entry point. 

Not needing to share passwords is essential to us. We have peace of mind knowing nobody can view passwords, share credentials, and operate outside their defined context within the network unless they have explicit permissions. That helps us sleep at night.  

Previously, third parties had VPN access, and it was important for us to shut that down. Now that the entry point is closed, there is only one dimension for us to consider; which vendor has access to what. This makes management and the general security picture clearer.  

SSO authentication was one of our main requirements, so that integration was crucial. It allows us to provide quick access to the tool itself using the same credentials. 

The solution stands above its competitors in this regard. Using the team functionality allows us to create groups of users with a team leader who can monitor those sessions. This functionality works great, and PRA is at the top of the spectrum here. Having somebody at a physical station and someone remotely accessing the station works very well, especially for training purposes. The recording functionality is another nice feature; the video view is small but can be expanded to a larger view. 

The integration client, backup solution, and SSO setup and provisioning could be improved. There isn't any documented or supported user provisioning currently, which slows down the processes of onboarding and assigning permissions. I would like to see this improved soon.

The Vault could use some attention, specifically in managing named administrative accounts. I have to assign permissions to my named admin account during sessions manually, but I think that should be the default. Admin account permissions could use some more automation and be adjusted to be more user-centric.

BeyondTrust could improve text-based auditing; it's not very readable. I can get the details through the jump client and other tools, but if I run a simple PowerShell command, the solution generates multiple lines for that specific session in the text audit, which doesn't make sense.

I was the lead implementer for the solution for one of my clients, a global pharmaceutical company. The project took over a year, and I used the product for another six months as both an end user and an admin before leaving that job. I used the solution for almost two years in total.

The solution never let me down during the entire implementation; though the integration client was the opposite, I was never satisfied with it. I recall some stability issues stemming from significant database actions that slowed down the system. There was also a bug that took both our team and the BeyondTrust team three business days to resolve, which didn't help with our impression of the tool.

I would say the SaaS offering isn't particularly scalable. The more endpoints we added, the more sluggish the tool became. However, BeyondTrust's high availability approach offers much better scalability on the backend side, and endpoints with added jump points can be clustered for higher availability. The sky is the limit by improving the database size and storage at the backend.

We had over 600 total users; mostly IT support and admin teams. There were also 10 to 20 vendors each with three to ten users that used the tool to remotely manage equipment. 

The product is used daily by a large number of users simultaneously. Before I left the company, the highest number of concurrent sessions I saw was 25. If I had to estimate, I would say PRA is used for over 300 sessions daily with the same number of users.

I would like to differentiate the implementation team and the technical support as they are two separate entities. The implementation team could improve how they guide the customer through the process. The technical support staff are knowledgeable and do everything they can to help, but they aren't the easiest to reach. They don't do user-to-user sessions, and the only way to reach them is through tickets. There is a chat function, but that's more for gleaning more details of the issue; I often just wanted to pick up the phone and ask someone a question or explain my problem to them. BeyondTrust's documentation appears to be aimed more toward executives than technicians, and that doesn't help the situation either.

This may have been specific to how we wanted to implement the solution, but a lot of technical information was missing. It took some back and forth through the ticket system to finally get that information via a member of support staff doing a screen-sharing session. Screen sharing is much more effective than only having a text chat, but it took too long for us to get there.

I would still give them a seven out of ten because they're very knowledgeable and do everything they can to help. The support system is impersonal; especially when we were starting out, that personal touch makes all the difference. Ultimately, this is about the security of our organization; we don't want to go back and forth with bots and tickets before finally reaching a member of staff who can help us.

Neutral

The initial setup was complex because we didn't know precisely what we wanted to achieve and neither did BeyondTrust, and the communication between us wasn't the best. It took a while for us to realize what we wanted to achieve, how the solution could deliver that, and in what configuration, and they could have helped us out more with that. It isn't easy to fill out the integration sheet; it requires a fair amount of product knowledge.

It took us six months to understand the basics and set up the tool according to our requirements. It took another six months to get the implementation going. That is partly because the pharmaceutical company required the solution to be qualified. That process took time because BeyondTrust didn't have much relevant documentation; we had to write much of it ourselves.

Deployment can be completed with one engineer and one server admin, with the latter deploying the clients and jump points. Once we understood the basic principles of the product, it became straightforward to implement. BeyondTrust could better convey that to new customers unfamiliar with their solution. A dedicated team of three to four staff is sufficient for deploying and maintaining the solution for an enterprise business.

I wasn't directly involved in the licensing and pricing, but I can say that PRA is licensed per endpoint added to the Vault. I would advise users to take frequent exports of their license usage package; it's a simple feature that provides a spreadsheet of every machine in the Vault. This helps to cut down on duplicate licenses, which can happen by adding the same endpoint using an IP address and a fully qualified domain name, for instance.

The implementation is an additional cost, and they offer several tiers, so the price varies. There are also some optional add-ons, so I would advise people to research the product well and find out precisely what they need regarding features. The Advanced Web Access add-on provides some required functionality when interfacing with websites; that's one to consider.

We reviewed two other vendors: CyberArk and Devolutions, but we eventually went with BeyondTrust for several reasons. Devolutions fell off quickly because it's too small, which is a risk. We liked the approach of operating over an outbound HTTPS connection to the SaaS appliance, which was more of a security benefit for us than the CyberArk solution, so we went with PRA.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

I would advise potential customers to have an excellent understanding of their requirements and what their landscape will look like five years down the line. Consider if the SaaS offering is appropriate, as I understand switching to a self-hosted instance isn't a straightforward process, so it's essential to plan.

If I need a privileged remote access solution in my future endeavors, BeyondTrust's offering will be my go-to, and I recommend it for any size of business.

We went with the SaaS version of the solution and had some regrets about that. Pharmaceutical companies must comply with a host of rules and regulations, and one of the requirements was to keep recordings of every session for over 90 days. The SaaS solution's storage did not meet our needs in a large enterprise environment. We had to use a third-party backup tool provided by BeyondTrust to download sessions to our local storage, but it was a poor tool; the error handling and logging functions were sub-standard.

The ability to operate without a VPN wasn't particularly a requirement. Our project aimed to secure administrative access, so our focus was more on user accounts than endpoints and connections. During our market research, we discovered that few solutions focus on privileged identity management; they're usually integrated with PAM tools like BeyondTrust PRA.

As a technician, I can vouch for both ends of that spectrum. The benefit of PRA being a standalone solution in our case is the ability to quickly and definitively sever that tie into our network. That being said, the solution currently doesn't solve all of our privileged access difficulties; we still have to manage roles and privileges in cloud solutions. I don't think there is a product on the market that allows for efficient management of both worlds; the cloud SaaS product and on-premises remote access.

Regarding leveraging service accounts as a password manager, there are better solutions, including BeyondTrust's own Password Safe, which integrates well. In terms of managing remote access accounts, PRA does an excellent job and provides relatively fine-grain policy permissions customization. We can have users operating accounts where they cannot view the password, and other users can access the password if needed to access some legacy applications, for example.

The help desk utilizes it for basic end-user support to make sure they can get something installed or just walk through an issue with an end-user. I use it a lot for helping other admins to fix servers.

Our RPA team also uses it. They basically have virtual desktops that have a script running on them constantly to move data from one location to another manually. They get in, and they use it to manage 50 different desktops for that team. So, three team members manage those 50 clients just to make sure that they're processing all the data correctly throughout the day.

We have a cloud solution. The virtual server is in the cloud, and then it installs the client down to all of our desktops. From there, the ones that utilize it install the admin client on their machines.

We have 20 accounts in there that are utilizing the solution, but not all of them are active at the same time. Throughout the day, all 20 of those may go in. They do what they need to do and then drop out of it to free up a license.

It provides us the ability to get an end-user back up and running and keep them running efficiently. We can fix something usually within hours, instead of a half a day to three days. They don't have to pack their stuff up, come into the office, and hand it to us to work on it. We're able to truly just sit there with them and help them get their issues resolved. It keeps our business moving.

It saves time. Without it, the RPA team would need all of those desktops in a physical format sitting in their office, and they would have to be on them 100%. Their time savings alone probably is man-days. They are not just saving hours per week. For the RPA team, I can't even begin to give the time and the amount of work this product saves. For the help desk and the rest of the tier-two support, it probably saves 2 hours a day for each member. There are roughly 10 of us, which is 20 hours a day of time savings of workload.

It is important for us that it does not require a VPN. Now that half of our people are remote, our data lives on OneDrive or Microsoft SharePoint. They don't need to be remoted into us through a VPN to be able to get everything. When we remote in, it is nice to not have to worry about whether they are on a VPN because for any number of reasons, they might not be able to get into the VPN, such as our VPN is down or the Dallas office is messing up. So, this flexibility gives us more options, and we like that.

Its security is very tight. I'm the one who manages who can use the software to remote into other machines. In my opinion, it is more powerful than what we need, and I am glad that it is because it gives me room to grow our teams to allow them to do more if they need to or restrict some to only do certain things if they don't need as many privileges whenever they go in.

It is available in multiple formats: as a physical and virtual appliance, or as SaaS. It is very important to have it accessible in multiple ways, whether it be on-prem or SaaS. It allows me to know that if my solution goes down, in a short period of time, I can get somebody to help me get something back up and running.

We can truly elevate our admin rights while we're in there to fully take control of a system and manage it as if it was sitting right here on our desk. Most of the organization has gone to remote work or work from home. With that being the case, this solution allows us to be able to still work with our end-users, even though they're not always sitting on our network.

Its management is through two different portals, and you can't get from one portal to the other. I have to literally open up another website and go into it a different way. There are no inner links between the two. They should interlink the actual virtual server and the appliance. In general, there should be one interface for management for admins.

I have been using this solution for close to seven or eight years. I have used it in two different companies. In my current company, we've been using it for a good long time. I don't remember when they originally started using the product. It was before I came on board, but I have been using it here for four years, and I've been the admin on it for a year. The previous admin left the company. So, I took over because I had the most experience.

It doesn't go down. The only time it goes down is whenever I tell it to go down. When I need to do some updates, it requires scheduling and taking it down, but the updates are user-friendly. It is time-consuming, and I can't schedule it. The way it is set up currently, I'm not able to just say, "Hey, do this at this time," and know that it is going to get done. I have to actually be involved with it. I am not sure if it is because of our setup or BeyondTrust. I haven't had enough training to know for sure if that's possible or not.

I have used their support. Every time I've used it, they have been very useful and beneficial. It has not been one of those things where I've felt I needed to spend the resources to see if they could walk me through setting it up. I used their support only a handful of times in both companies. In the past four years, I've only used them three times because the product is solid. I would rate their support a 10 out of 10.

Positive

I have used another solution. There is a night and day difference. Whenever
BeyondTrust is installed, it works, whereas the other one didn't work half the time. The BeyondTrust solution is absolutely reliable. If anybody ever asks me for remote access software for corporate-wide usage, this is what I'd tell them to go with.

I have not been a part of its deployment. In both organizations, it had already been deployed, but I know it was pretty straightforward. I've talked to the admins for both companies because I've always enjoyed this product. I just always wanted to know more about it, and both of them said, "It was one of the easiest." Working with BeyondTrust or Bomgar was super intuitive, user-friendly, and streamlined whenever they were setting up the product.

I wish it was a little bit cheaper, but when a product is as solid as this, I understand what the cost does. It helps them to make sure it stays that way. If you want a reliable, solid product, you're going to pay more.

I am testing the Vault for service account management, but the problem with it is that the admin credentials on local machines are randomly generated on a randomly generated timeframe. So, the Vault password can't be saved. Every machine is different, and the only way to get that password is to go into another portal, which is frustrating. It is not Bomgar's or BeyondTrust's issue. It is the way we chose to manage that particular account. I'm one of the only ones who utilize it, and I utilize it mainly for testing. If we had a full PAM or our PAM was truly integrated and was BeyondTrust's PAM solution, it would elevate our use of the Vault more, but I am glad that it is there. It allows me to save some passwords that I don't utilize on a regular basis. I don't have to remember those, and I don't have to keep them at multiple different locations. I can just put them there, and I don't have to worry about it. They're safe. They're secure, and they're easy to just have. The system pushes them through. So, I don't even see them anymore. So, it is double secure in my opinion because I don't have to even see the password to remember to type that in somewhere. It just puts it in for me. I appreciate that from the security side.

It hasn't had an effect on our network security outside of we had to open a couple of ports when remote happened so that the software gets installed correctly. It wasn't something concerning. It is truly a benefit in the long run.

When compared with some competitive products that are add-ons to PAM solutions, it is important that PRA stands on its own as a full solution. It needs to be its own solution but also interlink with other solutions. 

We don't use the solution to provide access to third-party vendors. It also offers SSO authentication, but I wish it worked with our solution.

I know we can do session auditing and monitoring of third-party and remote-worker access, but we just haven't used the capability. We have also not used audio integration during a remote session.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

I am in the energy sector. The solution is primarily used for something called interactive remote access. We have a secure environment where we manage the energy grid. The BeyondTrust PRA solution helps us meet a compliance requirement since we need to establish a protocol break before we start working on the electrical grid. Therefore, we don't have to walk into the room where the stuff is. It can be remotely accessed for us internally for the most part.

Right now, it is in the NERC system, which is the compliance control. This has an electronic access control system that allows us to get to our stuff. It also allows our vendors to possibly get to our stuff.

I use the tool everyday. I am logged into it right now. It allows me to do my job. I know that I am using the right thing, looking at who goes into what. If somebody needs help with a secure site, I can usually hop and help them, then it is done. It is very good and flexible. It allows me to do my job quite well.

Having a single point of getting anywhere running through its box is like another firewall. It is controlling all access to our secure network so nothing else can get through. Outside of the firewall, it is our network security. 

It is a real fortress. Its security is very strong. Multi-factor came as a feature out-of-the-box, which was big for us. That helps us meet another compliance requirement. It enforces encryption. Nobody can see what we are doing in our remote system if they happen to be listening for unencrypted traffic. That is its biggest strength.

Having a VPN just means maintenance. I have worked in the industry for around 10 years and have never enjoyed really working on anything requiring a VPN, either working over it or supporting it. As far as IT is concerned, it is no longer a great technology. We like how this solution uses a protocol that enforces encryption right away, like HTTPS. So, the solution is good to go and takes out one of the moving parts, since VPN can get quite complicated.

PRA is available in multiple formats: as a physical and virtual appliance, or as SaaS. We appreciate the flexibility, though we went with the physical in our deployment. We might go to the cloud or use a virtual appliance later. Therefore, I appreciate the flexibility. However, we went with the reliable physicals.

PRA offers SSO authentication, which adds to the encryption suite. You need to have it in order for the appliance to work. It makes compliance easier.

It is too much of a fortress. It is difficult for us to report on compliance when I need to check for that device. For instance, I need to monitor what version that device is on, and it is quite complicated for us to do that. You can't connect to it traditionally and that is by design. While they have made some improvements in their API connectivity, it is just not quite what I would really like. It requires me to kind of apply some aftermarket steps in order to get what I need.

There is no connectivity to the appliance side. There is no API, and it is just difficult for me to capture what version the device is on without going in and doing screenshots. It is a little too secure in that regard, where they don't even trust their product owner. Since a lot of hacks come from the inside, they are probably doing what they need to do out of necessity. It is just that I have to work pretty hard to produce compliance data on the box.

You can usually API into something and get whatever you need. Or, you can have an SSH saying, "Do whatever you need. Just do a Git version command." There is none of that with BeyondTrust. However, this is the least of my concerns compared to whatever it grants us in freedom for all our security compliance requirements that it helps us meet.

I have been using it for three years.

The physical appliances don't have dual-power supplies. Anytime our power goes out, like even for a second, it has a lot of trouble recovering, even though we have two of them in a cluster. It has trouble recovering after a power-related event on the physical side. We know that we don't really have a redundant BeyondTrust PRA, but they would probably tell me to use a cloud or virtual appliance.

Scaling is pretty simple. We can stretch it to different operating systems, devices, and command lines. We can use it in any way that we want, either on stuff or from stuff. I am confident we can work with it for whatever needs to be done.

The technical support has been okay. There have not been too many inquiries. I have asked questions from a developer on how to connect to it and gather the compliance data and was able to get an answer, which was nice.

Positive

Some people working remotely have used TeamViewer. However, we have migrated the privileged remote access since then for our security flexibility.

We looked into this solution for its ability to meet our compliance requirement. It is one of the leaders in Interactive Remote Access. When an auditor or whomever sees the solution, they say, "Okay, you are on BeyondTrust. This should be pretty simple." Out-of-the-box, it meets a lot of requirements. We don't need to go out of our way to prove requirements because they are in the manual of the solution saying, "There is encryption." 

When the world went remote, we also looked to get off TeamViewer rather quickly and enforce users getting onto a privileged remote access solution. We wanted more control of who could come into the network as well as not be subject to a hack of TeamViewer. Now, we have everything run through our internal network instead of bouncing off Germany.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. It is simple and elegant in its design. It is pretty clear how to get things configured. There are a few quirks with getting some policies in force for particular types of workers. Once you get that down and have it working, it is a set-and-forget solution. It is not nearly as complicated as some other implementations that we have done with different apps.

It took two weeks to implement.

Instantly, we were compliant with one of the SIP standards.

It doesn't allow for multiple monitors without some extra steps. TeamViewer allows you to open a monitor in one tab and another monitor in another, then you can drag that tab to your monitors at home. Therefore, you can have a dual monitor setup at home. BeyondTrust doesn't work like that, and our users hate it. It is possible to do this with RDP technology, but next to email, RDP is one of the least secure protocols in the world. We don't really want to use that, but we have been kind of forced to lately when trying to get away from TeamViewer. That is one thing that TeamViewer has, it can tab to multi-monitor support.

PRA stands on its own as a full solution. We appreciate their presence in that realm. You will get part of what you want from TeamViewer, but you are getting quite a bit more with a PRA. You can roll it out via on-prem, cloud, or virtual. You control a lot more of it, controlling what people do. Whereas, with TeamViewer, that is so much more difficult. 

I am considering a cheaper competitor since that is what we moved over from. However, I don't think that we have really looked at many other vendors for this since I have exactly what I need from BeyondTrust.

We are monitoring vendor sessions. We will probably start monitoring our own so we can use it to see what happens in regards to a security incident. We can also go back and use it for troubleshooting or see exactly what somebody did inside of their remote session. At some point, we look forward to turning on the session recording. We just hadn't done it yet, not for internal staff.

There is no unattended remote access for vendors that I am aware of, but we know that we can use the solution to do that. Some have done that in the past. We just don't do it all the time and probably not in the last year.

My usage of the solution is primarily in the secure network. I don't have any kinds of sounds that I really need to listen to.

It is hard for us to roll so much trust into one thing at a time, because what happens when that thing is gone? You need to have an adequate backup plan, and we have not quite gone that far yet.

We have an audit coming up this year, because of that it is hard to really decide to do anything new. We kind of have been told, "Hey, stop getting new stuff. You have to get through the audit first."

I would rate PRA as 10 out of 10.

Our company has been growing, and we have many audits as well as SOX compliance requirements. We have different SOX requirements, and we wanted to ensure that every activity is monitored. That was the main reason for deploying this solution into the environment.

We are using it like a VPN access for our external users, such as vendors, to allow them to access the resources within the organization. Instead of providing them the regular VPN access, we give them access to the privileged access solution so that we can monitor what they are doing, and we are able to view back the recordings of all the activities they've done.

We have not integrated Privileged Remote Access (PRA) with other solutions at the moment. We also have another solution of BeyondTrust. We have integrated that solution with other solutions, but we haven’t integrated PRA with other solutions. We just use it for remote access and credential injection.

It has put us at the forefront when it comes to security, auditing, and meeting SOX requirements. It is a top-notch solution for us in these aspects. Security is the key to fulfilling SOX requirements. Ever since we deployed it, we are able to provide external auditors, who audit the company, with recordings of who is in the environment. We are able to see what is happening. We are able to provide access durations and show who is accessing what and who has been given permission to access. It has really helped us in those aspects.

The fact that PRA does not require a VPN goes a long way for us because instead of our external users installing different VPN applications and having different user names and passwords for different applications, they can just make use of it via the web. They don't need to install an application, which is a very cool and nice feature for us.

In terms of security provided by PRA when it comes to access for remote and privileged users, the users get to access only what they are permitted to access. They can't go beyond what they're allowed to access. You don't have to give anybody the credentials to privilege accounts. The solution allows you to do account injection while you are using the solution, which is really good for us. So, you can do credential injection while accessing the solution, which is a top-notch security feature for us where you get to manage privileged credentials within the organization.

It is available in multiple formats. It is available as a physical and virtual appliance, or as SaaS. When we did the PoC, it was before COVID. We did the on-prem deployment for the PoC, but immediately after the PoC, COVID came, and we started to think of what will happen when we are not physically present. So, we had to go for the cloud solution, which is quite cool as well. It takes the burden away from IT admins, and we don't have to think of how many servers we have to manage.

It is important that through the use of PRA, there is no need to share passwords with users. We are able to do credential injection where you don't get to give users privileged user accounts. With the solution, we're able to do the privilege injection, which makes it perfect for us. Nobody gets to hold onto the privileged accounts. With the solution, we are able to inject it, which is good for us.

We are mainly using it to give access to third-party vendors. In order to ensure that we monitor the activities of what they're doing, we use PRA for their access. All our external users come in through PRA. For every internal user, we use the regular VPN. We are also looking into the cost of getting more PRA licenses if we are going to put every other user in the company on it.

We have integrated it with our Active Directory, which allows us to apply our Active Directory password policies. We don't need to create any other user account for whoever is coming in. We just get to create a user in Active Directory, and password policies are already applied. So, users come in by using the Active Directory credentials, which is another level of security as well.

One of the features that I really like about it is the ability to set a start date, time, and end date for the access. For example, you can set the access for a person from tomorrow, Monday, or Tuesday and ending on a specific period of the day or a specific date. That's really quite helpful.

You can use the solution to access not just the Windows environment; you can also access your Linux devices and even your network devices. That's a very cool feature for us.

At the moment, I don't see any major problems with it. If anything, they can just change the look and feel of the login screen because it looks too simple to me. It does not have so much information. When you get to the login screen of the solution, you should have more information. We also have BeyondTrust Remote Support, and the login page looks similar to BeyondTrust Privilege Remote Access. I would love to see more rich information on the login screen or landing page so that rather than having a regular sign-in screen or page where you just provide a username and password and get into the solution, you should have more insight into what the solution does. I've mentioned this to them every time I have had an opportunity.

It was deployed last year.

Its stability is good. It is top-notch. They are doing well because I can see the way they do release updates for the solution. They are also at the top in terms of security updates, vulnerability assessments, and other things that are currently happening. They are doing well in terms of updates, which are also helpful in stabilizing the solution. With regular updates, you get a stable solution and also more improvements and features.

We are using cloud deployment. When you have a cloud SaaS solution as compared to having it in your own cloud environment or on-prem, you do not get to have much say on scalability. If you have deployed it within your environment, you get to see how to scale it up or scale it down, but when it is a cloud solution, you don't get to see what happens on the provider side. However, you get to know that at least you have been provided what you have paid for, and it is working perfectly. So, for me, scalability comes into the picture if I am managing the infrastructure within my environment, but that doesn't mean you can't talk to your provider to tell them that you want to include other things in the solution.

Their technical support is good. At any point in time, when I needed support, they responded quickly. There was a time when the local vendor reached out to us that there is a new upgrade, but on logging onto the platform, we couldn't see the update available. We reached out to their support, and the support personnel who picked up the case told us to give him just five minutes, and he will ensure that the update is available. Their technical support is beyond cool. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

We didn't use any similar solution previously.

We went for the SaaS solution. They provided the platform and the access to the UI to the local vendor, who is a product partner. 

Three people were involved in its deployment. One engineer from the local vendor worked with two people from my end. One of them was from the server side, and the other one was from the networking side. 

We didn't evaluate any other solution. We were already using BeyondTrust Remote Support to support our client's computers. It was deployed during the COVID period. Initially, it was implemented because management was thinking about how IT would manage the situation when working from home. The users had no credentials. With remote support, we were able to do that perfectly, which also gave us assurance that BeyondTrust PRA would work well for us, and we won't have any issues with it. So, the management was able to sell PRA to the top management. There wasn’t much discussion about it because of the previous experience that we had with BeyondTrust Remote Support. It has already paved the way for PRA to come into the environment.

I would tell others to just go for it. If they are security conscious and are concerned about security within their environment, then just go for it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

One of my customers used old, poorly coded legacy applications, so programs required admin privileges to run. They wanted to give users the ability to run the applications without giving them admin rights.

The company wanted more secure desktops, and the solution provided that. Previously, everybody was an admin of the desktops, and they suffered a cryptographic lock attack. They recovered from this and implemented PRA to avoid repeating the scenario. They bought 500 licenses, the estimated number of staff using the legacy applications. They planned to upgrade to around 1000 licenses a few months later, realizing they had other applications that necessitated this kind of solution. 

The project goal was to allow staff to run applications with admin privileges without being admins, which was the product's most important feature.

The company had distinct groups of staff with different requirements, which weren't fulfilled by giving them all admin rights. The solution's data granularity allowed us to define specific use cases and population types and categorize users based on that. This gave us good control over the system. 

Privileged Remote Access not needing a VPN was a requirement in this case, as the user didn't implement a VPN, nor did they want to. This feature was a plus for the customer. 

From what we observed the security provided by RPA is very good. 

The solution being available in multiple formats was necessary in this case, as the client was adamant that the solution needed to be SaaS; a requirement for their IT configuration. The ability to test issues was crucial to them. 

The solution has improved the security of the client's network. 

Not needing to share passwords was crucial to the client. They were hesitant about credential sharing because of the suffered cryptographic attack.

Having an all-in-one solution was vital in this case, as most of the users did not have technical expertise. This necessitated a solution that is easy to use and implement, and an all-in-one solution simplifies the process significantly. 

The solution is very flexible, which is a plus, but I would say the implementation requires someone with knowledge and experience, as it can be easy to get lost in all the details. The implementation process could be streamlined and simplified. Though the complexity of the solution provides greater flexibility, it requires a lot of time to understand it fully.

The UI is somewhat basic, so that could use some work. It's okay; apart from that, it's an aesthetics issue.

I implemented the solution for one of my customers, which took three months, then I passed it over to them. 

The solution's stability is good. It's reliable and I didn't experience any bugs or glitches.

The product's scalability looks good. My client purchased 1000 licenses, maybe 10% for developers, and the rest for end-users. They need a functioning application without a complex IT setup and maintenance. 

Their customer support is very good. They are quick, knowledgeable, and helpful.

Positive

I carried out the deployment myself, and it was straightforward. I implemented it with Azure, and it took three months. One member of the security team is responsible for the maintenance. We had help from the publisher to set up the tool, and our strategy was to do an initial deployment for 100 users for proof of concept, then deploy for the remaining 400.

My client found the solution a bit expensive but considering their use case and requirements, they didn't have any other choice. As far as I know, implementation and licensing are the only costs. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

It's essential to get to know the product in detail because it's very complex. It can do whatever you want, but it requires some effort. That's why it's important to have an implementation team who knows what they are doing. It's crucial to delegate responsibility for the solution to someone who understands it and can work with the publisher team to find the proper configuration.

I use the tool in my lab. I am involved in the product's testing phase in my lab, where I am trying to check out the solution.

The issue I found with the product revolves around the fact that RDP and SSH sessions take too much time, making it an area of concern where improvements are required. The product should be able to handle RDP and SSH sessions in a span of ten to fifteen seconds.

I have been using BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access for four weeks. My company has a partnership with BeyondTrust.

Our company will be contacting the product's technical support soon.

I used Delinea two years ago. The seniors in my company decide the solutions that we need to work on within our company. My company also deals with the solutions that our customers want.

I have experience with Delinea, which I found to be more complicated compared to BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access. In Delinea and BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, areas like configuration, RDP, and SSH are almost the same.

Any PAM solutions, like ARCON, Delinea, or BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, offer the same features, while there may be some differences. I am checking for the differences between different products and learning about such areas in depth.

I rate SailPoint a ten out of ten.

I rate Delinea a seven out of ten.

Speaking about the use of the product for vendor management, I would say that I am currently working in SSL Wireless, where we work with BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access for the deployment of products like Asha Cement in Bangladesh for over two months. I joined the team in my company around four weeks ago, after which I have been trying to install BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access in my lab for testing purposes and use cases so that I can try to figure out what the organization wants to do or try with the solution.

The product has improved remote support capabilities since it works fine. In my company, we found some issues with our clients who found it to be time-consuming, especially when they started a session with the help of the product. Our company's clients have concerns related to why it takes too much time when it comes to RDP sessions. If I want to handle multiple sessions at a single point in time and want to access two or three servers at the same time, I have experienced that it closes the sessions after two or three minutes. The clients don't want sessions to be closed when using the product, meaning they want to be able to use three or four servers at the same time since, at times, they want access to network devices while simultaneously being able to work with application servers or any other servers.

The feature of the product that I found to be the most effective for controlling remote access stems from the fact that I didn't find any differences between the sessions offered by the solution, but there are some queries related to the sessions from the clients' end. I am waiting to have a session with the product's support team. I have made a checklist before communicating with the product's support team so that I can clear out the confusion related to the solution.

Any PAM solutions, like ARCON, Delinea, or BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, offer the same features, while there may be some differences. I am checking for the differences between different products and learning about such areas in depth.

When I try to access multiple servers with the help of the product, the solution should work properly since I am not someone who works with one server at a time. I may need access to multiple servers, during which I may face issues with BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access.

I have tried to access the product without a VPN in a local environment. I haven't used any VPNs on the servers I use. If given a chance, I can try to use VPNs, along with BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access.

Considering that I have used Delinea in the past, I would choose BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access in the present. I cannot speak about other PAM solutions in the market.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for Privileged Remote Access. The primary use case is to let the suppliers connect in a very, very secure way on privileged endpoints and internal privilege endpoints or internal operators, probably from Azure. They operate something in the Azure cloud, and that's a very secure way to connect to the Azure cloud.

It's one of the most secure products in the market. 

They have very good support. They have really have great support.

It's everything that we need. It's like a Swiss knife. We can do everything with that to produce what we need for Privileged Remote Access reasons. 

Every three to six months they bring new features like processes, access processes, and things like that, which are unique in the market. I have not seen other solutions offering what they offer.

The documentation is really great. It's cool. You can download all the documentation you need at any time. They've done it in a great way.

The API is great and we can automate anything that we need with the product.  

If you know what you are doing, it's not a difficult setup.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is excellent. 

The solution offers many great integrations.

I cannot say that the solution is lacking any features. It has everything we need right now.

They could probably integrate a wizard or something like that to add a new use case. It could be something that makes it easier to add a new use case. That's something they could probably improve. I'm not sure about this, however, as the direction is anyway going more and more in the direction of automation. That said, for a beginner customer who is starting from scratch, probably a wizard would be a good feature to add.

The on-premises version is not as easy to set up as a cloud deployment,

We've used the solution for about five years. We started using it pretty much from the moment it came out. We have worked with the solution for a while. We've benn BeyondTrust resellers, however, for 15 years.

It's got great stability. It's really great. In all the 15 years I used the remote support solution, and the five years we used the PRA solution, we never have seen an unstable situation with any of the components of the product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution is scalable. You can do a worldwide rollout of the product. This is an Enterprise product, and so the scalability allows you to expand over multiple countries, over multiple locations, with their technology. 

The company is best suited to enterprise level organizations - specifically medium and large ones. 

They have really great support. If you have to call, for example, someone at Microsoft, you need to wait in a queue about 30 minutes, or here in Switzerland, some companies, have outsourced the support to other countries. Then you have to wait in a queue and wait for a person which is helping you. At BeyondTrust in all these 15 years, normally you have a wait of one or two minutes, and almost immediately you have a person in the chat, which helps you, and a competent person. They are very quick and very responsive. 

This is an on-premise product. You cannot really compare with the other products from the cloud, which you just click and then work. There is a setup process, and you need an admin with a certification. It's not so easy, however, if you have the right guys in place, then it's no problem. 

Normally, anyway, this is an Enterprise product, and in the company, you have a person which is administrating this product. BeyondTrust is an Enterprise solution, and therefore, you have to do some kind of rollout as well.

Typically, users will see an ROI within about a year or so. It gives you the best tool to your employees they can have in that area. And therefore the return of investment comes very fast.

The pricing depends on the model you choose. You can have it as a cloud version or you can have it as an on-premise version and therefore the prices vary. The initial costs are normally a little bit higher than with other products, however, after two or three years, it's a bargain. It's just that the initial cost is a little bit higher. That said, due to the functionality it gives to your team, the return of investment comes very fast.

We are a reseller, not an end-user.

While we do use different deployment models, many of our clients are government-related and therefore we deal a lot with on-premises deployments. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. It's definitely on the upper level, well above what else is available.

I would recommend that those considering using the solution do a certification course similar to when you install Windows server or something like that from Microsoft where you can become a Microsoft certified professional, and you can attend a class and then you can do an exam about the product. 

I recommend that a company which uses the product has also a certified admin. It makes it lot easier. That way, they can really profit from all the functionality the product has. The product has many functions however, you need to give it to a person with enough know-how. Otherwise, the company will not use all the features the product offers.