CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Reviews

We use the solution as a vault for whatever passwords we use for connecting to an API or job services. The admin passwords we store in Password Vault. Via CyberArk, we have made a use case where we can track the session, keep a record, and log it, to whoever is logging into the servers.

CyberArk is basically used for privilege access management. It used to be hard to control security from internal employees. For products, and production servers, tracking used to be very difficult. 

Although One Identity Manager also provides similar services that CyberArk provides, they are no match to CyberArk basically. The amount of details and logging that CyberArk provides is command level. That really streamlines the process of tracking those internal servers. That's one significant advantage, I would say.

CyberArk's best aspect is it lets you store the password, and it allows you to connect to those connected systems' passwords. For example, there is an AD in your organization, and you have stored the AD password. Say you want to change the AD password; you just have to change it in CyberArk. CyberArk itself will change the password in the connected system. That's one nice feature they have introduced in the latest features. 

CyberArk is not friendly in terms of having a Community Edition. It's enterprise software. They could maybe give a Community Edition that you can just play around with and see how the software is. It's a very, very costly app. 

Therefore, they can definitely give a demo version or some sort of a Community Edition with partial features at least to help potential users understand its capabilities. 

The initial setup can get complex. 

I've used the solution for about four and a half years.

In terms of stability, there are no complaints. CyberArk, I would say, is an industry leader in this portfolio, especially in Privileged Access Management. There are so many identity access management tools, and almost all of them say that they are both IAM and PAM service providers. However, CyberArk is the only one that is specifically for Privileged Access Management, and they really do mean it. With CyberArk, the PAM is really too good.

We have 5,000 users at least on the solution. 

For Privileged Access Management, it's been used extensively.

I've never dealt with technical support. I'm more of an end user in this case. We rarely have to literally dig down into the implementation. There is a different team that exclusively works on CyberArk, and that's the team that basically deals with day-to-day CyberArk operations.

In both organizations I have worked, they've used identity access management as Dell One Identity Manager, and for Privileged Access Management, CyberArk.

We basically used to have a separate Password Vault that was KeePass. 

With KeePass, there was a security incident in our organization where a few of the passwords got leaked, and then it was challenging to track how the leak happened. With all that considered, G-PAM or CyberArk Password Vault was considered the next solution to prevent these sorts of things from happening again.

The implementation process is a bit complex. If you know this software or the product very well, then setting it up is not that big a deal. However, if you're a newcomer, then of course, it's not a piece of cake. As a new user, I'd rate it 2.5 out of five in terms of ease of setup.

We started from the development stage, where the maximum amount of time was spent. In a live environment, you can't have that much downtime. Roughly you are allowed for one and half hours, or a maximum of three to four hours for downtime. In a live environment, once we could identify the clicks and hacks of the software in the lower environment, it was pretty easy to do. There, it took roughly one to one and a half hours to do, and that part was pretty smooth.

CyberArk is such a stable product that either they launch a new version, which you have to latch onto very quickly as they censored the support for older versions, and with these security products, you can't really stay along with the older versions. Usually, the products are very stable. They don't need multiple patches or updates. One version itself is self-sufficient. At least in my four and a half years of experience with this product, I have seen fewer intermittent updates. Once they launch a new version, that's a different thing. However, from a maintenance point of view, it's very user-friendly and lightweight. Even usage of the tool is very speedy. It doesn't lag one bit.

We handled the initial setup completely in-house.

This is very costly software. However, I haven't really dug into the licensing. My organization gives all its employees a free license and therefore I don't have to worry about pricing. My organization is a partner with CyberArk also. Even so, we just have one instance as a practice instance. 

I did not choose this solution, and I'm unsure if other options were considered. 

The hired architect chose it. I just had the opportunity to implement it. If he evaluated other options first, I have no knowledge of them. 

My company has various levels of partnership with CyberArk.

I'm typically using the latest version of the solution. CyberArk sunsets their older versions very quickly. They won't let you use the old versions.

CyberArk has many components. Password Vault is one of the components. Then there is the CyberArk for server monitoring and logging. These are the two components that we have used extensively. However, apart from that, there are many more applications for CyberArk also, which I haven't used at the moment.

To those considering the solution, I would say when you do the installation, to get on a call with technical support. Keep them on hold. If you are really doing it for the first time and are not aware of the software, you may run into issues.  The public forum of CyberArk is not that good. Their documentation is not that great, and it's not that well maintained. The problems that you may face are seldom covered. Therefore, when you are paying that much money for high-quality software, you can at least ask for better help from them.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

Privileged Access Management is basically used to just keep track and log. We have to provision those accesses. If a newcomer comes, they have to be identified to ensure they are the correct users. So for those, there is a web implementation where there are some products that you can order, then they're approved. Depending on that mechanism, it's been decided, oh, this is a valid user. That's how it's been managed.

Privileged Access Management in CyberArk is one of the very first features that was implemented as part of Privileged Access Management. Then came Endpoint Manage and finally the Password Vault. From the very beginning, once Identity Access Management as a service started, with Dell One Identity Manager as the first service. Then came CyberArk. I don't think there is an additional benefit that it has brought. It's sort of an essential commodity in the entire Identity Access Management infrastructure.

For me, Privileged Access Manager and One Identity sort of merge together. For me, the best part of CyberArk is Password Vault and Endpoint, basically. If you ask me what's there that, it's that everything is pretty straightforward. There is no confusion. It's a pretty straightforward application to work on.

It is a scalable product.

The solution is stable. 

They should allow further customization as it's really hard to do any further customizations over CyberArk. We do have a wrapper of customization. However, it's very difficult, especially their web implementation. That's one thing I would say they can improve. With Angular and everything on the market, they still have their in-house web implementation tool, which is sort of a headache. 

I would love them to improve their UI customizing features. 

You simply cannot install the demo UI in every customer, basically. They would always ask for something to make their UI look a little different -  simple things like their logo or some sort of additional information pertaining to their particular customer. Even doing the smallest of changes takes a lot to do. 

The solution is stable and reliable. 

I haven't been faced with intermittent bugs like I do on One Identity.

With CyberArk, we rarely get those situations. It's a very, very stable software. You rarely need to raise any bug or service request with them.

It's pretty scalable. Although we haven't increased our infrastructure once, we have installed the latest version. Even then, adding other infrastructure items into the portfolio is not a big deal once you have done the initial installation.

Our organization is more than 30,000 to 35,000 people. However, only a handful of them are entitled to Privileged Access Management. There might be only 5,000 users. It is used quite extensively.

It sort of was implemented with One Identity Manager when Identity Access Management came into the picture. In early times when there was simply Excel as an identity access manager, and then there was nothing basically. Once there was the onset of proper identity access management without in-house custom tools or proper streamlining process, this solution was added. Initially, One Identity was sort of used as a Privileged Access Management also. However, soon they realized that it lacked in a lot of places for Privileged Access Management. That's when we went to CyberArk. That was way before my time.

I have been part of the initial implementation. However, the day-to-day operational tasks are being handled by a different team.

I was part of a migrational project. When I joined this organization, they were just migrating from the last stable version to the present stable version. It was pretty straightforward. There was, in my organization at least, documentation that was a bit more thorough to follow. That helped me a lot.

The implementation takes quite some time. Even in production, we have to instantiate the service. We had to take a special weekend, which means downtime since this is a critical application. Therefore, moving this takes some time. It's not that there are glitches and all. It's such a heavy application that requires moving so many things. For us, it took around nine to nine and a half hours roughly to deploy. This is considering if I take off all the in-between stoppages and breaks.

Privileged Access Management is a complex topic. I won't say that any of the tools are straightforward. That said, if you are thorough, then it's pretty straightforward for people who are in this industry.

I'd rate the setup process a four out of five in terms of ease of implementation.

With every security tool, new users learning by themselves is a bit difficult since the material isn't openly released. It's released if you have a partnership or if you pay for the software. That makes learning the tool a bit difficult. If you are interested in learning, the only thing is to get a job in that field. If your company is using it, it's like learning by doing. That's the only way you can learn about this product.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our main use cases for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are privileged access management and privileged session management. Another use case of the solution is password rotation.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager improved our organization by identifying the owners of the service accounts. Each service account should be associated with an owner because without an owner, that account becomes an orphan account that nobody can take ownership of, so this means nobody would know what that account is doing. When we brought in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, it helped us have a roadmap that allowed account ownership and account onboarding. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager gave us a roadmap, a plan to follow, and a guide on how to manage privileged access, and this is very important because we don't want privileged access to be compromised or breached.

Realizing the benefits of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager was a long journey. It was not an easy journey. It was a long journey to put things in place and get them onboarded because not all applications were compatible. It took six months to a year at least, to start the process properly.

The applications which were in Active Directory were easy, for example, it was easy to onboard the accounts and rotate the passwords because that meant only running scheduled tasks. There were a few accounts, however, where the applications weren't compatible with password rotation, particularly old applications or legacy applications that would break if the passwords were changed. To get all those sorted and to get all those in place, and explain what those changes were, took a lot of time, but for accounts that were just running scheduled tasks or services, those were onboarded easily and had their passwords rotated, particularly those which had identified owners.

One of the features I found valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is privileged session management. It's a feature that allows you to record the session, so if there's a risk, that risk can be highlighted.

I also found it valuable that CyberArk Privileged Access Manager can be integrated with PTA, and this means that it will tell you if there's a risk to the logins and signs of risk and if risky behavior is observed. It's a good feature.

Another good feature is the CPM because it helps you rotate the passwords automatically without involving the admins. It can go and update the scheduled tasks and the services. At the same time, if there's an application where it cannot do all of these, CPM will trigger an automatic email to the application owners, telling them that they should go ahead and change the password. This allows you to manage the account password that CyberArk cannot manage, which helps mitigate the risk of old passwords, where the password gets compromised, and also allows you to manage the security of the domain.

Integration is also a valuable feature of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. It has an application access module function that allows you to integrate and manage applications, including BOT accounts. It also allows you to manage ServiceNow and many other applications.

What could be improved in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the licensing model. It should be more flexible in terms of the users. Currently, it's based on the number of users, but many users only log in once in four months or once in five months. It would be great if the licensing model could be modified based on user needs. We even have users who have not logged in even once.

Another area for improvement in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the release of vulnerability patches because they don't release it for all versions. They would say: "Okay, you should upgrade it to this point. The patches are available", but sometimes it is not feasible to do an upgrade instantly for any environment, because it has to go through the change management process and also have other application dependencies. If that can be sorted out, that would be nice.

I've been using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for around seven years now.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is a stable solution.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is deployed on-premises in the company, so I'm unable to comment on scalability, but they do have a software as a service model, so that's scalable.

Technical support for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is responsive. As for their timelines for completing tickets, it would depend on the process. Sometimes it takes them less time to respond, and sometimes it takes them longer. They have different levels of support, so if level one is not able to resolve it, they escalate the issue in due time to the next level of support. They're mostly able to help.

On a scale of one to ten, with ten being the best, I'm giving their support an eight. There's always room for improvement, and in their case, in terms of support, what they could improve is their response time, especially their response to business-critical activities or issues.

The company was probably using LockBox before using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, but I'm not sure about that.

Installing CyberArk Privileged Access Manager was easy. It's only the firewall you need to introduce into the environment that takes time, particularly if you're doing an on-premises model.

I saw a return on investment from using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. It's a good privilege access management solution and identity and access management solution as a whole. It's a really good product.

The solution was definitely implemented because it saves you time and money, for example, access management and privileged access management are now automated when in the past, those processes were done manually. The new feature CyberArk DNA was also given free of charge, so that DNA tool can scan the environment for all the vulnerable accounts for password hash attacks, for accounts where the passwords were not changed. That definitely saves time, because that type of scanning would be very difficult for someone to do manually, and the report that comes out of that scan is very objective.

I'm not involved in the purchase of the CyberArk Privileged Access Manager licenses, so I'm unable to comment.

I was not part of the evaluation process.

I recently switched jobs, so I was working with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager in my previous organization, and also using it in my current organization. I'm using version 12.2 of the solution.

In terms of maintenance, it can be monitored through SCOM Monitoring, but the vault is standalone. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager can enable SNMP Traps so that the vault can be monitored automatically and it can trigger an incident to the ticketing tool the teams are using. It has the ability for automated monitoring.

My advice to others looking into implementing CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is to know their network properly. If they're doing an on-premises deployment, they should know their network properly, and they should first audit their environment in terms of the accounts they're going to manage on CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. They should also assign the owners and assign everything beforehand to help make implementation faster.

I'm rating CyberArk Privileged Access Manager nine out of ten.

The primary use case and the most used functionality of CyberArk PAM is managing privileged access (an easy way to pass permissions to specific servers to specific users granularly) and password management (an automated solution that manages password validity, expiration, etc.). PSM gives a possibility to set all connections secure and it is possible to re-trace actions made by users during such sessions. It is a good tool for extending usage to new end targets sometimes even out of the box.

CyberArk PAM ended a scenario where several dozens or even hundreds of privileged accounts had the same password or administrators had passwords written down on sticky notes. 

I have experience with onboarding thousands of accounts - mostly Windows, Unix, and network devices. I have developed (customized based on defaults) password management plugins for Unix systems and network devices.

I like the integrations for external applications. There are actually infinite possibilities of systems to integrate with - you would just need to have more time to do that. It is not an easy job, yet really valuable. I am not an expert on that, however, I try every day to be better and better. I have the support of other experienced engineers I work with so there is always someone to ask if I face any problems. End-customers sometimes have really customized needs and ideas for PSM-related usage.

The Vault's disaster recovery features need improvement. There is no possibility to automatically manage Vault's roles and for some customers, it is not an easy topic to understand.

I noticed that CyberArk changed a little in terms of the documentation about disaster recovery failover and failback scenarios. Still, it is a big field for CyberArk developers. Logically it is an easy scenario to understand - yet not for everyone, surely.

I've used the solution for around five years. I have been using CyberArk PAM as an end customer for three years. For another two, I work as a CyberArk support specialist.

Stability is overall good. However, there are many error messages that are like false-positive - they do not produce any issue yet logs are full of information.

The scaling has been mostly positive. It seems not hard to scale it up.

Sometimes it is hard to understand the capabilities, limitations, etc. They try to help with that.

Positive

I've never used another solution that would have the same or similar capabilities.

The initial setup can be complex. It is important to go really carefully step-by-step with instructions. When you do that, you can be 100% sure everything will work well.

When I was an end-customer I recall using a vendor for the implementation and support. Now, I am a vender and therefore I do it by myself.

Licensing may sometimes seem a little complicated. A good partner from CyberArk can work it out.

Unfortunately, I have not participated in evaluating other options.

Overall, I am really glad I worked with CyberArk for five years.

The solution's most valuable features are one-time password and exclusive access.

CyberArk is complicated and costly to deploy for Windows servers compared to a few other vendors. It would be helpful if they combined all the components on a single server. Also, they should release a version specific to small businesses with two servers installation architecture.

We have been using the solution for three years.

The solution is highly stable. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the solution's scalability a ten. It is the best in the market. It can scale to any infrastructure. We had implemented around 1000 target servers for our previous customers.

The solution's training documentation compensates for efforts to raise the tickets. We can resolve the issues ourselves based on the documents provided by the vendor. If you contact them for any problems, they solve them within a few hours.

I have implemented the solution for small and large enterprises. I haven't come across any bugs or issues. I use the 12.2 version as it is more stable, and I have more experience working with it than the newer version. It is easier to deploy if you know how to use it.

The time taken for deployment depends on specific project requirements. In the case of lesser servers and target machines, it takes about a few weeks. Whereas for a larger number of servers, it takes around two to three months to complete. The process involves setting up servers to host password vault, API access, central policy manager, and SM server. Additionally, for customer-specific requirements, we can set up Distributed Trusted Host (DTH) server for privileged analytics and Privileged Session Manager (PSM) for session management.

Apart from the deployment, it involves configuring policies, setting up additional connection components, etc.

The solution is cost-effective for the features. In comparison, other vendors would charge extra for the same features. Also, its pricing model is based on the number of users rather than the number of servers. Thus, there are no additional costs. I rate its pricing a six or seven.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it a ten out of ten. It is user-friendly once you understand its functionality.

The solution helps our developers access internal systems. It also helps us in Privilege Access Management.

The tool’s pricing and scalability can be better.

I have been using the solution for five years.

I would rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten. It is stable.

I would rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten. The tool is scalable.

I would rate the tool’s setup a nine out of ten. The solution’s setup is easy. We have a good internal implementation team who completed the deployment in a few days. About five to six engineers worked on the tool’s deployment.

We have an internal integrator for the tool.

We have seen ROI with the tool’s use.

I would rate the tool’s pricing a six out of ten.

The tool is robust and our IT team is happy with it. It provides you with strong security.

The most common use case is when you need to hide the management for the servers, switches, routers, et cetera. You can use privileged access for remote use cases.

In my company, we have a lot of servers, and the problem is when the users want to access these platforms. You can access all the architecture and knowledge with this product. It provides more access and visibility.

The password rotation and cyber gateway have been quite useful. It's a solution that allows you to search for passwords for your servers and accounts. This is the most feature power.

The solution is quite stable.

It is scalable on the cloud. 

The implementation is hard. For example, the on-prem implementation specifically is really hard to deploy. 

The solution does not scale well on-premises. 

This is an expensive product.

It's hard to get help from support if you are not certified. 

I've been using the solution for five years. 

The product is really stable. You just need to deploy a higher viability solution. However, you need to do a lot of budgeting to deploy that higher viability solution. You need at least 12 servers. It's really, really difficult to have a budget for that.

It is easy to scale on the cloud. It is difficult to expand it on-premises. 

We have 30 people using the solution in my company.

At this point, we do not have plans to increase usage. 

The technical support is really excellent. However, if you don't have a certification, it is impossible for you to receive technical support.

We previously used BeyondTrust and Centrify, among other solutions.

The initial setup is pretty difficult and it takes a while to put into place. 

You need at least six servers to deploy it and it's really difficult to have a budget for that - plus, the implementation itself is really hard. You likely have to dedicate one week to deploy the solution and another week or two to onboard all the accounts.

Basically, it's pretty complex to implement. 

We've used a consultant to assist us with the implementation. 

The ROI is really quick. If you have a compromised account, it can compromise your infrastructure, and the loss of the business is really high. With this product and the protection it offers, you can witness ROI immediately.

You need a large number of servers, and therefore it gets expensive to deploy the product.

The license is expensive. It costs us around $200 per user. 

We are using a privileged cloud and an on-prem cloud, an on-prem APD. We have a hybrid setup.

I'd advise potential new users to have very good scripting at the outset. If you don't, you'll have difficulties in the long run. 

While the solution is expensive, it's excellent. I would rate it ten out of ten. You definitely get what you pay for. 

The concern on our end was separating the components, including the password storage component, and having everything completely separated. 

The scalability is very easy.

The most valuable aspect was being to be able to manage it through multiple mediums. We can manage it through its command line interface, web view, and directly logging into the digital environment with permission. You have multiple mediums. You don't have to give direct access to the world every time you want to limit what admins should do and what they should not do.

CyberArk has the biggest number of features available when you compare it to other PAN solutions like BeyondTrust, Thycotic, and Delinea. They tend to have a lot of separate components.

Performance-wise, it is excellent. 

The components of their web view, policy manager, and session manager, most of them are separated. We need something which can unify those components into a single appliance. Sometimes the infrastructure team is hesitant to provide more resources. 

They have a lot of out-of-the-box integrations with a lot of other products. However, I would want them to bring on some kind of similar platform. If they can bring up the SSO on-prem, that would be ideal, as they don't have those things on-premises. They only provide that for the cloud. If they can do that, it would actually help a lot of us and keep us from trying to acquire multiple technologies for solutions.

I've used the solution for six or seven years at this point. 

We are very stringent on the performance metrics and would rate the solution very high. It's stable. 

We found that scalability was much easier in CyberArk. In BeyondTrust, scalability required purchasing extra virtual machines every time we wanted to scale it up. However, in CyberArk, we don't need to purchase extra components. It comes along with the line.

Currently, we have around 78 to 80 admins, and there are around 200 underlying accounts. 

We previously used BeyondTrust.

I haven't compared it to Thycotic yet, however, from what I have read, it looks like CyberArk is better. I've also looked into Delinea.

We are reselling the solution to customers.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's quite a good product.