CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Reviews

We primarily use this product for privileged identity management, restricting privileged IDs, and governance. This is the primary function of the program, and what we expect from it within the broad business level.

One limitation is that we are not able to put this into a decentralized mode.

This solution is quite stable.

We have no issues with scalability.

The tech support is decent. 

It takes a while to adapt to the product.

I do not have experience with the pricing or licensing of this product.

I think having a distributed architecture would certainly help this solution.

• This product provides accountability and audit trails for privileged account access. 
• Automatic password rotation every 24 hours to adhere to our internal compliance guidelines.

• It helped us in SOX, PCI, PII and HIPAA compliance. 
• Accountability, as far as knowing who has access to what.

• Reporting and PSM I feel are the two biggest points for us. We provide our audit team with failed password reporting, safe membership, and privileged account inventory reporting.
• The DNA scan is very helpful and provides a security baseline for your environment. I highly recommend running a DNA scan on your environment.

• Implementation documentation could use some improvement in a few areas. LDAP integration would be one area.

• Providing a way to group accounts by application would be nice.

My primary use case for this solution is to prevent privileged access, privilege accounts, and to mark all of those for future ordering proposals. It is to limit their access.

The most valuable feature is that it always provides flexibility, password quality and one-time user check-in and check-out. It also provides flexibility and a comprehensive reporting. In terms of reporting, it can pull up to three types of reports and you can do some Excel work on those. Then, you will be able to find information that you were looking for. It is is the reporting by-laws, as well. Apart from this, it also has a lot of advanced components. It can extend the picture at the end of the productive scope.

There was a functionality of the solution that was missing. I had noticed it in BeyondTrust, but not in this solution. But, recently they have incorporated something similar.

It is a stable solution for our needs.

The scalability provided by this solution is a lot better than some of the other available products on the market.

The technical support has been tremendous. They try to resolve the issue as soon as possible, but sometimes I would expect them to engage an L3 level of support at the very first moment, as for priority, but they take a bit longer. 

Sometimes, when we install their product, the BFN (Bridge to Future Networks) to the component manager, we have issues. When we install this component in high ability mode, and the load balancer, then sometimes that creates different problems. Sometimes, to find the issue we actually, even if one of the component goes down, get notifications easily. That is not an issue, but to rectify the issue, sometimes it takes longer than I would like, you know. When it goes for a higher ability mode for the component then it makes our work a little a cumbersome.

This solution is considered to be more expensive than others out there on the market today.

I have previous experience with BeyondTrust. And, there are other products, such as Lieberman and Arcos, which are being used in the Indian market because of its cost effectiveness.

CyberArk has vast trust across the globe. People who've used CyberArk usually don't go back and change the product, unless it is a cost issue. If it is a cost issue, I must suggest BeyondTrust as a cost-effective solution for similar services.

Our primary use case for this solution is privileged threat management and session management.

I have an affinity towards CyberArk. I find that it works out-of-the-box, as a product.

I really like the PTA (Privileged Threat Analytics). I find this the best feature.

From what I see, like the out of the box password management features, or you can pay the tax forms, which I will write log, can become extensive. For example, we have right now 45 to 50 platforms to tell that were out of the box, like Cyber Optics 200 out of the box connectors, so if we can just put those also into out of the box so that the pros do not have to retell everything to what they think the comp manager of Cyber Optics representative. Apart from that, if we could have some kind of out-of-the box feature that you can simply say "no" so they don't have to go into a development mode, that would a really helpful feature.

I would not say there is a stability issue. There are quite a few bugs, which I have discovered in versions 10.1 and 10.2, but I believe that was rectified out of scalability.

I have no scalability issues at the present time.

I believe the tech support staff can be more proactive. Right now, I have booked a ticket with tech support for an issue, and I have labeled the ticket "moderate priority." The response from tech support was at best, an answer within three to four days. I believe that is too much time, and can be shortened.

It's straightforward, I mean probably who for 11 years of experience is quite straightforward, but maybe for a newbie, it could be complex.

I do not have any opinions to add about the pricing.

I think if the industry could work together on TSM connectors, this would be a cutting-age change.

The primary use case is password management. 

I find the threat analytics is an important feature. CyberArk can look at the log details, and analyze who is using the applications, which are their locations, and which are the IP locations from which they are accessing. This enables the solution to find the exact location the threat is emanating from. We really value this feature.

The usual workload on the system is sometimes delayed by CyberArk. So, any major work is getting delayed, and may take twice the amount of time that it usually does. For instance, if there's a password change of an account it will take time because you have to log in, then  authenticate, and this is followed by delays. It becomes cumbersome and frustrating.

It is a stable product. 

The scalability of the solution is good. We expanded, and we found the biggest part was a bit unfomfortable in terms of product. They are designing, leveraging the features so greater different markets are joined. On the ground it was difficult initially.

I found techincal support is adequate. The Indian team is not so good. They are OK with helping, but not all of the engineers are entirely experienced. 

The initial setup was OK. If I set up one box, one automation, one machine, within one program, it is O. But, if I have multiple locations in Japan, China, Asia, Singapore, and the like, I will have some trouble. I have faced this problem in the past. 

It is quite costly. The license is a concern for some of the clients. 

I have previous experience with Oracle in the past. There is an ease of use with Oracle, because it is small and not very complex. You can wrap your work in a single day with Oracle. In comparison, the API is quite small with CyberArk. But, the product itself is so robust.

Our primary use case for this solution is it provides a security solution that includes password management. This defends against threats.

The most valuable feature to me is the recording feature. I can track all of the records, the commands, the server, any misguidance, etc.

Over the past seven years, I have seen a lot of ups and downs with the product, but now I am happy with the version that we are using now. 

I have no issues with stability. 

It is scalable. We have added new equipment, and this solution has been relevant. 

They are very helpful for us whenever we have any questions. 

No, I do not have any advice on the price of the product. It is a great product that I recommend to others. 

I did not consider any other options. 

This product is helpful for financial auditing needs, as well.

One of our customers is using the 9.5 version of the solution.

We personally use the product. We are implementing it and have a lot of involvement in its usage.

We use it primarily because we need to manage business accounts and reduce our inboxes.

It has improved the way our company functions on the basis that they're expanding, and the SDDC management solution and the decision to bring on security licenses under the system umbrella, then has passwords and the system management be a requirement in the coming quarters. We are already doing a small PoC with the relevant themes of the natural habits of the security teams. 

The password reconciliation and its limitation with respect to access in target servers along with the end users apart from the import, which is already available. This helps our customers in their software requirement imports.

The lead product has a slow process. There are some reports and requirements from CyberArk which are not readily available as an applicable solution. We have made consistent management requests in the logs.

It is stable. They have had subsequent releases with patches for bugs. 

With respect to scalability, it depends upon how much scalability you need in the moment. 

There is not seamless stability in the support. Sometimes, we don't have any level of support which is required when something critical happens.

We were using the Centrify solution for managing UNIX apart from CyberArk. However, the scope of the Centrify solution is not as wide as the CyberArk solution.

Initially, there was a lot of hiccups, because there were a lot of transitions due to manual installations. 

Eventually, the licensing cost benefit doesn't happen or maximize the customer's profit.

Network and security licenses are currently being managed by other outsource vendors, so they are facing some type of problems in the digital aspect. 

Recently, there has been some new licensing guidelines which have come up since 2018 related to installation by technicians. However, we had our solution installed in 2015. 

Work off your roadmap for implementation.

We recommend CyberArk solutions.

We are using it for privileged access management.

• It is very secure. 
• The voice technology is very good.
• It is very simple to use.
  

We haven't had issues with scalability.

We have good support from support. They are very helpful.

We did not have a previous solution.

The initial setup was somewhat complex, but we received help from the product support team with the installation.

The product is costly due to its active management features.

The product is the best in the market at the moment.

I would recommend the product for sales learning.