CyberArk Identity Reviews

I am using CyberArk Identity for privileged identity management or access management.

The most valuable features of CyberArk Identity are its ability to control access to administrative staff.

CyberArk Identity could improve by having the ability to better manage the network, such as Cisco. There seem to be some issues in this area.

I have been using CyberArk Identity for two years.

I rate the stability of CyberArk Identity a five out of five.

The scalability of CyberArk Identity is very good.

I rate the scalability of CyberArk Identity a four out of five.

We have 100 people using this solution in my organization. IT staff are the ones mostly using this solution.

We are using other solutions similar to CyberArk Identity, such as Azure Privileged Identity Management. 

Azure Privileged Identity Management is more mature than CyberArk Identity. However, they operate in slightly different spaces. They do not overlap each other. Additionally, Azure Privileged Identity Management cannot work on-premise.

The implementation took approximately three months.

We used a third party for the implementation of the solution.

I would rate the price of CyberArk Identity a four out of five.

There is an initial license and then there is a subscription needed.

I would advise others that they should plan the network hardware integration well in order to bring it onto CyberArk Identity. They should also do adequate change management with administrators and users because CyberArk Identity does add a layer of extra complexity.

I rate CyberArk Identity an eight out of ten.

We integrate the CyberArk components with the UiPath Orchestrator tool to manage all the passwords for our bots. We put all our automations on a VM, which runs the script. That's what we call a "bot," but we need service accounts to manage all these. We have customers with hundreds or thousands of bots, and it's challenging for us to manage the credentials for those service accounts. We use CyberArk to rotate the passwords 30 to 60 days, depending on the customer requirement.

CyberArk gives us that functionality. We have a credential vault where all the passwords are stored, and we can rotate them by connecting UiPath to CyberArk. We store the credentials for those bots in the vault, and CyberArk rotates the password, communicates with the orchestrator, and gives back the username and password. UiPath Orchestrator is the central control tower, if you will. It accesses those VMs using those passwords and runs the automation.

The two most valuable features of CyberArk Identity for us are password rotation and the ease of integration with UiPath Orchestrator. 

I don't have any feedback for ways Identity could improve — at least not for this use case.

I've been using CyberArk Identity for about a year and a half.

CyberArk Identity is very stable. We haven't had any issues at all.

Identity is more scalable than some other products I've tried. Others have some limitations in terms of environments, layers, and segregating different service accounts. The majority of my customers use it for their entire company, so that's a lot of users. However, I couldn't estimate the user base on average.  

I work on the integration side, so I haven't dealt with CyberArk's tech support much. We only called them one time when the CyberArk component was offline, and they helped troubleshoot it to get the services back up and running. It was just all done within one call. We haven't really had any other issues. And I think the support was pretty good.

CyberArk Identity is kind of expensive.

I rate CyberArk Identity 10 out of 10.  Identity is the tool that offers the most seamless integration with UiPath Orchestrator and the most utility from an automation perspective.

The tool helps with authentication. It acts as an MFA for any kind of privileged access that occurs in our organization.

The tool has issues with the third-party SMS gateway. The solution has its own SMS gateway. Integration support is a challenge when we don’t use their SMS gateway. The tool also needs to improve its scalability.

I have been working with the solution for two years. I use the tool’s latest version.

The solution is stable. You can expect one ticket every three months.

I would rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten.

The tool’s support is neither good nor bad. You need to wait a long time to get to the support.

Neutral

I would rate the tool’s setup a seven out of ten. The solution’s setup is easy if you have the right person for it. A person who is inexperienced with the deployment process should go through a lot of documentation to install the solution.

The deployment will take around three to four weeks to complete if the servers are configured properly. Our deployment took about two weeks to complete. You need only one person to deploy the product.

I would rate the tool’s pricing a seven out of ten. The product’s pricing is expensive and is on a yearly basis. You will need to pay around 10,000 GBP for 500 users.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. We have enterprise-based customers for the solution. I think Okta is a good solution compared to CyberArk.

The solution could be easier to use and I found it to be very complex involving many steps.

I have used the solution for approximately three years. 

I found the solution to be stable.

The solution has good technical support.

The solution's initial setup was straightforward. 

We used a vendor team to implement the solution. 

I rate CyberArk Identity an eight out of ten. 

I use CyberArk Identity for filling out demonstration environments for clients that have it installed on their premise or they're using the cloud version. I just create it for a proof of value demonstration.

More integrations would be better.

I have been using CyberArk Identity on and off for about a year. 

I don't really worry about stability. I just have to get it up and running. Then I move on after that.

I'm sure it's scalable. I haven't had a chance to test it.

I've not had to use it, had no experience with it.

The initial setup is straightforward. It takes me up to an hour and a half. 

I do it all myself. I am in the sales side of the house. I do the initial consulting work for the client and then deploy.

I would rate CyberArk Identity with a nine out of ten. 

We use CyberArk for security purposes.

If anyone makes an error, or if an incident occurs by accident, the business will not be harmed as a result of this activity.

The user interface could be improved.

I am not familiar with the CyberArk tool, but we're working on vulnerability management, as well as some other functions, to ensure that the asset, software, and other applications are installed on the servers. We engage in this type of activity on a daily basis.

I have more than 15 years of experience in information technology. I've spent the last five years primarily working in a project team. I'm working on this type of activity and the tools for the customers or the business's needs.

CyberArk Identity is a stable solution.

We are currently using Qualys for vulnerability management. And we are only using AD Connect for that privileged access.

With CyberArk the initial setup is straightforward, we login into the servers to give the users access to that directory.

I have not seen a return on investment, but I am not familiar with this area.

I'm a member of the project team, we primarily use this tool whenever we need to work on this. Otherwise, we don't use it on a daily basis.

In terms of the customer requirement, we use it whenever we are required to work on these tools.

I am an employee, and my company is a partner with CyberArk.

I would rate CyberArk Identity a nine out of ten.

We sell as well as use this solution for our IT operations. We are using it for single sign-on. We are a small company, and we have a few users of this solution.

The user self-service program and the Office 365 provisioning service feature are the most valuable. It is a very easy and feature-rich solution that gives priority to the users and security.

They can include the Mobile Device Management (MDM) feature.

I have been using this solution for four years. It was a Centrify solution previously. 

It is stable. There are no issues.

It is perfect.

We used their support a few times, and the response was very good. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment was very short and easy. It involved just a few steps and took a week.

I am happy with this solution. I would rate Idaptive a ten out of ten.

We are still testing this solution, but our main use case is for integrating multiple IDs for the on-premise Active Directory.

We have been testing this solution for approximately one year, but it is not yet in production. 

The feature that we find most valuable is the ability to integrate multiple IDs for on-premise Active Directory.

This solution has MDM (Mobile Device Management) features, but they are weak. We would like to see an improvement in the ability to manage mobile devices. 

I think that there is a weak point in the Japanese market because they currently do not have a service person in Japan.

We haven't encountered any problems with respect to the stability of this solution. It is very stable.

I do not think that scalability is a problem, but I have not had experience with a very large scale implementation.

Their technical support is very good. The response time is not too great, although they can respond in a very short time by email.

We used to use another product, but it did not have the necessary features. This is why we switched to using and selling Idaptive.

The initial setup for this solution was very straightforward. It only took one day to deploy.

We find that the pricing and licensing of this solution is adequate, as compared to the other competitors in the market.

The product is good, but they have a weakness in the Japanese market without a service person.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.