No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Ekran System vs Safeguard by One Identity comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 20, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Ekran System
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
User Activity Monitoring (4th)
Safeguard by One Identity
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of Ekran System is 0.9%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Safeguard by One Identity is 4.4%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Safeguard by One Identity4.4%
Ekran System0.9%
Other94.7%
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

Andreas Lalos - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Professional Services at Besecure
Early threat detection and diverse OS support with enhanced security
Ekran System offers a lightweight solution that does not impact the systems where it is implemented. It provides rich metadata for monitored activities and includes threat analysis capabilities for early alerting and investigation of unauthorized actions. Additionally, it supports diverse operating systems and allows for monitoring and enforcement policies, like blocking actions for policy violations, and provides a retention of historical data in a lightweight format.
Mahesh Malve - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Business Development Associate at DigitalTrack Solutions ind pvt ltd
Centralized control has strengthened privileged security and simplified audit investigations
While One Identity Safeguard is a strong and reliable PAM solution, there are a few areas where it can be further improved to enhance user experience and scalability. Regarding the user interface and experience, the UI, while functional, can be a bit complex for new users. A more intuitive and modern dashboard with simplified navigation would improve adoption, especially for non-technical stakeholders. Regarding integration flexibility, although it supports major integrations, expanding out-of-the-box connectors for more cloud-native apps, DevOps tools, and SaaS platforms would be beneficial. Faster and simpler API-based integrations could reduce deployment efforts. Regarding scalability and performance in large enterprise environments, performance tuning and scaling can require additional efforts. Enhancing seamless scalability and high availability configuration would improve enterprise readiness.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It supports diverse operating systems and allows for monitoring and enforcement policies, like blocking actions for policy violations, and provides a retention of historical data in a lightweight format."
"One Identity Safeguard has positively impacted our organization by contributing to a significant drop in compliance and audit overhead, aiding in the preparation of security audits that were previously chaotic, making the process much simpler now, and improving operational efficiency and admin satisfaction."
"It is easy to manage. There is a very logical, clear user interface. Also, the integration of scripts is thoughtfully implemented. Overall, it's a nice product to manage."
"We are able to log and get reporting on all privileged activity that is being performed. We like the fact that we can leverage the session recording feature, which is especially valuable when we're dealing with third-party vendors that have to remote into our our boxes and servers to do any work on behalf of the bank. Now, we can record everything they are doing to ensure that they're only doing the changes that were needed. In addition, we use it to leverage knowledge transfer with our internal staff."
"Technical support is brilliant."
"We were able to take an environment where we had several hosts managed by different people and consolidate that into a single, centrally managed solution."
"I have successfully connected Identity Manager (IGA) to Safeguard to achieve Privilege Access Governance, making it possible by using an OOTB connector in Identity Manager to talk to the Safeguard system so I can govern the data from Safeguard and provision PAM accounts from Identity Manager to achieve a complete lifecycle."
"The solution's most valuable features are the efficiency and the quality of the recording."
"Using this solution has been a great decision in helping with our tasks."
 

Cons

"Ekran System could improve in terms of communication to the market, particularly after their rebranding as Shiteka."
"One Identity Safeguard could be improved by simplifying the user interface and initial configuration process, especially for first-time users."
"If I had to point out something that could be improved or is sometimes seen as missing, it would be user experience or UI."
"The deployment affects our privileged users because it takes a long time for them to request privileges, which impacts the SLA."
"We have not had any issues with the core product itself, but there is an add-on called SCALUS, which is quite critical to the user experience, and that does not work. They have been having issues with that for quite a long time, like months. That is not great at all."
"We are still in the onboarding phase, and it seems very manual. Ideally, a single interface to integrate all these processes would be useful."
"It is a good solution, but it needs more marketing."
"I find it complicated to implement HTTPS monitoring because the documentation is unclear."
"Unfortunately, my experience with Safeguard by One Identity's customer support is not very positive. They tend to respond slowly, generally do not find solutions effectively, and it is challenging to request calls that could resolve issues more quickly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Safeguard is cheaper than CyberArk."
"The pricing is about $80,000 per 100 servers. There are few elective costs."
"The pricing depends on our perspective, our budget, and, of course, the competitors we are taking into account."
"The full license is expensive but if you plan to use it in a big organization then it is the best option because it is more flexible."
"We have a yearly license. The cost depends on how much a company wants to invest in technology. In our organization, we believe in modern digitization and automation processes so we found it affordable. One Identity was not that much less than other solutions and it is not a cheap solution. There were number of cheaper solutions. However, it's the most effective, according to our evaluation."
"Its subscription cost is too much, and sometimes, it is very difficult to pitch the solution to the management for cost approval. If the cost is reduced a little bit, it would be easier. If its cost was less, many other organizations that currently cannot afford it would be able to use this technology. I'm sure many organizations around the globe are having issues with identity management, and it is a very difficult task for IT to manage privileged accounts."
"They have comparable pricing. All identity products are essentially priced in a similar way. It's a per-user base."
"As compared to other products, it is reasonable, but the training sessions are too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
919,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Outsourcing Company
14%
Retailer
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business93
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise40
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ekran System?
The business model has become more complex with changes in feature licensing, yet they provide affordable options, particularly with the standard edition, which doesn't charge for the management co...
What needs improvement with Ekran System?
Ekran System could improve in terms of communication to the market, particularly after their rebranding as Shiteka. The solution does not support other protocols beyond traditional monitoring chann...
What is your primary use case for Ekran System?
The primary use case for Ekran System is third-party vendor monitoring and privileged access management monitoring. It is also used for privilege access management solutions.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Safeguard?
My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing of Safeguard by One Identity is moderate.
What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?
Safeguard by One Identity could be improved by making the interface even easier to use, expanding reporting and analytics, and providing more customization options for access policies. It would be ...
What is your primary use case for One Identity Safeguard?
My main use case for Safeguard by One Identity is securing and managing user identities and access across the application with a focus on improving authentication, enforcing access control, and red...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Deloitte, UPS, Seoul National University, KDN, Finat, Constitutional Court of Korea, Ukrsibbank
Cavium
Find out what your peers are saying about Idira by Palo Alto Networks, One Identity, Okta and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM). Updated: October 2026.
919,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.