Delinea Secret Server Reviews

We intend to replace our pairing password management solution with something more enterprise-friendly.

We are currently conducting a demonstration with Thycotic Secret Server.

I've only used this solution a few times as a demo and haven't explored everything it has to offer, but I have experience integrating it with our Active Directory and setting up the server.

I like the one-way hash, as well as the ability to store it in the cloud and access it from anywhere.

I like the fact that you don't have to have separate databases for each department in your organization. 

They have one central location, that they all go to it. 

They all go to the same central location. If they leave, we can disable their account, reset their password, and integrate it with our Active Directory.

At this early stage, and based on my demo experience over the last two weeks, it appears to have more features than we require, but we can grow into it.

It's a great product. It seems that you could do your privileged access and things like that where you do the IEM. You could also make it so that those individuals have access for a set period of time to do their administration. These are the types of features we haven't really used, but I can see them being very useful. I can also see where they're going with this product, which is an all-in-one solution. 

It appears to be well-developed.

Although the password policy was interesting, the default setting was inadequate. As a result, we had to change it to be 20 characters with symbols. It was an odd process, but it was relatively simple to adjust.

I have been using the latest version of Thycotic Secret Server for a couple of weeks.

Thycotic Secret Server is a stable solution. We didn't encounter any bugs or glitches.

It appears to be pretty easy to scale.

We have fewer than ten people to test the demo in our organization.

We may decide to use this solution, and we are attempting to budget for it. We must sell the features and show that the extra cost is justified.

I have not contacted technical support. We had our representative involved, and he brought in a technical person to assist with the build, as well as being available to answer questions.

We are working with Jira.

The initial setup was fairly simple.

We are going from a free product, which isn't necessarily a fair comparison because it brings many things to the table, but it appears to be reasonably priced.

It would be beneficial if it were reduced.

I haven't tested many other products, but this one appears to be quite good. I believe it is comparable in the industry.

I haven't used this solution a lot, just in a demo capacity. I haven't explored all that it can office. I have worked on the integration with our Active Directory, and we set up the server.

I would rate Thycotic Secret Server an eight out of ten.

We have used Thycotic Secret Server for some secret management and integrated it with some applications. We mainly used it for Privileged Account Discovery and the management of them.

The discovery engine is really robust and flexible. It had some session management features that are better compared to some other vendors. Overall the GUI is very good and straightforward to operate compared to other solutions. For example, CyberArk and Hitachi tend to be hard to navigate.

When working with larger enterprises Thycotic Secret Server becomes a little cumbersome to work with because they do not allow as much flexibility as some of the other competitors, such as CyberArk. Thycotic Secret Server could improve by being more flexible when it comes to customization, and increase the number of API integrations.

In an upcoming release, there should be more AI and machine learning features. Some of the competitors are leaning in this direction.

I have been using Thycotic Secret Server for approximately two years.

There can be some stability issues when you use the video record feature. You have to be careful when you turn on the video recording features and what you want to record because the data adds up quickly. There is a performance impact to your network as well, that has to be planned for. Users think it is a fancy feature and they want to use it but you have to plan ahead of time before you use it.

The solution is able to be scaled and it is not too difficult.

The last organization I implemented the solution in they have approximately 900 users using the solution.

The technical support is good. They were able to give us support when we needed it.

I have used other solutions, such as CyberArk and Hitachi.

The setup was straightforward.

When comparing the price of Thycotic Secret Server with other solutions it is reasonable.

My advice to those wanting to implement this solution is they should know their requirements. It is a great solution it fits your requirements. It is important to know what you need to integrate with and how.

I rate Thycotic Secret Server an eight out of ten.

We are a Thycotic partner. We use Thycotic extensively, and we also do a lot of implementations for them. Generally, it is for privilege access management and session recording capabilities. 

A few clients have used it as a proxy capability, and the functionality there is that the privileged accounts have access from their workstations to the servers. In order to get access, they have to be basically proxied through Thycotic for an SSH or RDP connection, and then you have a control capability for auditing and session recording.

We have used pretty much every version since 2018, including the latest version. We have deployed it to AWS and on-prem.

I like that it is Windows-based. It is good that primarily, it is not an appliance. Some of the other applications in the space, such as a Quest Software CPAM or a Safeguard, are appliances, so you can't deploy the ends of them. With Thycotic, you can either install your Temporal Protection module physically in the VM host, or you can use BouncyCastle for high-security module capabilities.

One thing that I wish they would do is to have a Kubernetes or container-based deployment supported, but they're not quite there yet. Containerization or support for containerization would be fantastic.

I have been using this solution since 2018.

There is nothing major. There were minor things that were really edge cases. We've had an issue in 2019 where if you went through the web interface to change your password, the agent that actually did the password change on the backend would go and make the change to the main controller or the active directory domain controller. After that, without waiting long enough for the change to finish committing, meaning waiting for zero nanoseconds, it would go and check to see if the change had been accomplished. So, they introduced a slight delay of two to three milliseconds, and that fixed the problem. It was really straightforward, but it took a little while to demonstrate what the actual problem was.

With our latest versions, the scalability is very good. They have a scale-out and scale-up capability depending on what your needs are and how distributed you want the capabilities to be. I don't know any other products on the market that are better at scaling.

We have deployed it to small organizations with 10,000 users. Our largest organization has 10 million users.

I would rate them a nine out of 10. You get forwarded around a bit, but you actually get somebody who can really help and solve the problem for you.

It is very straightforward. We generally do an automated deployment by using a script-based capability that we've created. It works out really well. 

It is a kind of self-serving advice, but I would advise getting a partner to deploy it for you. There are a lot of really good partners out there, not just us.

In terms of the maturity of their product, there are a lot of Enterprise capabilities that they haven't yet brought into the market, but after it has been called out to them that there is a customer who needs a capability, they're very quick and responsive around doing development to get that capability in, which is something I like. There was an Enterprise scalability capability where you have high availability and multi-site failover. One of the versions that they had back in the 2018 and 2019 timeframe did not support that capability. We called out some recommendations to them, and they had it in the product in the next major revision.

I would rate Thycotic Secret Server a 10 out of 10 because I am not familiar with any products that are capable of going on-prem and have a superior function set.

We use the solution to store all of our secrets. For example, passwords, usernames, and other credentials. These credentials can be from many places, such as service accounts, bank accounts, and key pairs. It also has the functionality if, for example, a contractor requests to log into a specific server, they would use the Secret Server to log in to the server session that is monitored and he or she would be logging in without the actual real credentials. It is also on a rotating password system.

I have found most valuable the automatic scheduled password rotation and remote desktop monitoring. Additionally, the documentation is readily available and easy to find and the dashboard is straightforward.

I would like to see scheduled reports in a future release.

I have been using this solution within the past 12 months.

I have found the solution to be very stable.

You can set up two different servers and the process is straightforward. The solution is scalable and we have 70 users using it in my organization.

We might increase usage in the future but it all depends because currently all of the operations teams have been provided for. If the operations team grows, there would be room for more usage.

The technical support needs improvement. For example, if you have any problems on the server configuring the IIS, they would provide you very limited details and they would tell you the problem is on your end. They are limited to only supporting their application, even if you have the slightest problem assessing their application through IIS they will refer you to contact Microsoft.

Additionally, the sales team could be more friendly and helpful.

I would rate the technical support of Thycotic Secret Server a seven out of ten.

The installation was straightforward.

There is an annual license fee per user and the price is fair.

I rate Thycotic Secret Server an eight out of ten.

The tool has many models. The tool also has a good cloud version. Also, the customers need not control any components on the solution side. The product's licensing model is also good since customers can choose a price that is most useful for them. The solution also supports password management for the users in your organization.  

The tool should integrate additional features like OCR. 

I have been working with the tool for two years. 

The product is stable. 

The product is scalable. 

The tool's product support is nice. 

The tool's setup is fast and simple. The product's deployment follows a step-by-step process. 

I would rate the tool a nine out of ten. I would recommend using the solution. It has many features like password management. You need to also evaluate the vendor before finalizing the product. 

The product can be improved by reducing the number of updates provided and limiting notifications to mainly major updates.

I rate customer service and support as six out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was a bit complex. I rate the process as six out of ten.

The licensing costs are expensive for this solution. I rate it five out of ten.

I rate the solution seven out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by reducing the number of updates provided and limiting notifications to mainly major updates.

We use Delinea Secret Server for password rotations for end-point access.

The most valuable feature of Delinea Secret Server is secret password management.

Delinea Secret Server can improve by extending the monitoring policies and making the performance better.

I have been using Delinea Secret Server for approximately six months.

The stability of the Delinea Secret Server is okay, but other solutions are better, such as BeyondTrust.

Delinea Secret Server is scalable.

We have approximately 1,000 end-users using this solution.

I have not contacted the support from Delinea Secret Server.

The initial setup of the Delinea Secret Server is easy. The installation and other processes take approximately three to four hours.

There is an annual license needed to use Delinea Secret Server.

My company decided to use this solution because of its privileged access management.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Delinea Secret Server a ten out of ten.

One valuable feature is that it will support a dedicated database. Delinea provides multiple features, like reporting and remote password changes.

The UI needs improvement because the interface is a little clumsy.

I've been using it for almost two years.

It's stable.

It is scalable and is better than other solutions. We have 400 users in our company.

We can't say that technical support is good because they respond according to their time zone, and we are not in the same time zone. I would give them a six out of ten.

Neutral

The deployment was not difficult and took one and a half months.

We have an enterprise license as well as a user license and a support license.

I can recommend this solution and will rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We use Thycotic Secret Server for the lab environment. We have it as a vault for users and in a client project. We have set it as the users' mass login to the secret server so they have access to their SVN. It is for remote access, password changing, etc...

We use it on premise, mostly. I haven't used the cloud version, but we are discussing with the client about using the cloud deployment.

Its most valuables feature are its main purpose - the password changing and the Heartbeat so the user has access to only their SVN and does not have access to any other. Thycotic's access privileged management tool allows you to grant access to users for a specific period of time and with specific attributes and privileges.

In terms of what could be improved, the whole thing with distributed engines, et cetera, is a little bit tricky. Additionally, many clients wanted a more cloud version. I know there is a cloud version of Thycotic Secret Server, but a whole unified platform would be good, not like where you have to set up a connector with the distributed engine and then have the Thycotic Secret Server connect with all these. Making a simpler version of connecting different sites and synchronization of the groups that you already have. Then the secrets and folder templates would follow the current infrastructure pattern that the client has so you don't have to recreate new folders and secrets from scratch. In other words, more interoperability with other systems, for example if a user already has a Microsoft Azure subscription. So, the integration with Microsoft as well would be good.

We have been using Thycotic Secret Server for about a year and a half.

In terms of stability, I would say, yes and no. We had some issues regarding the size of the disk space, which was a Thycotic side issue. There were many log files that they couldn't delete. And then we have another issue with the service account. We have to use another service account for Thycotic, and there was a mix-up with the database. All these issues were from the Thycotic side.

We're logging the tickets and I think there will be a resolution in the future.

Scalability is okay.

We use it for lab environment uses. We have about 20 users, not too many.

It takes one person to deploy in our environment.

We do have plans to increase. We have a live contract and other client requests for Thycotic, including maybe the cloud deployment. I hope it is not as tricky as on premise. Maybe it's easier, I don't know.

The initial setup depends on the client. That's why Isaid earlier that there should be a simpler version where we connect all the different sites, et cetera. Because for client installation and deployment, you have to set up two different servers for high availability, for example, and connect another through your site connectors for the distributed engines, and the client didn't have any load balancers. So, there were many issues and the Thycotic was a little bit tricky at that moment. It wasn't just a simple solution where you set up a server and you have it up and running. 

The other thing is, and I think it's important, there is not much documentation on the internet. Besides the partner portal it would be nice if there was a blog or something that we could use. So for most cases, we have to open a ticket, either us as partners or on the client's side.

Our license is yearly.

Thycotic Secret Server is a good solution for what it does. We are happy for that, but maybe they can improve some features. Let's say the keystrokes function doesn't work. We have reported that to Thycotic, but they still have many improvements to do.

On a scale of one to ten, I think Thycotic Secret Server is an eight - maybe.

The primary use case is managing access for user groups and individuals in a very large environment.  

One of the best things about Thycotic is that it is very easy-to-use. It is logical, it has well-designed screens and a nice GUI interface. It has good performance and is generally a pleasure to operate.  

If you look at Thycotic, it is a great product that has pretty much all the same features as CyberArk — which will be replacing it. There is not much difference between the two. We will be switching away from using Thycotic, however, before the end of the year.  

The catalyst for the change was a formal comparison of the two products that we did using each to evaluate how we would use it in solving actual use case issues. In the presentation of the scoring over specific categories, CyberArk had slightly better professional service marks and the same price. Besides that, the two products were neck-and-neck and almost identical in the scoring. CyberArk just came out just a little bit better than Thycotic in the details, and not by much at all. Be that as it may, the formal comparison is the reason for the change.  

Thycotic has been in use in our Healthcare system for four years.  

Thycotic is a rock-solid product. Our organization never had any issues with it.  

If you consider the shere physical size of the Healthcare environment, you can tell from that just how scalable the product is. Not every product can handle 55,000 network elements and 15,000 servers.  

The technical support for Thycotic is very good as might be expected. The members of the support team that I have been in contact with are very much on the ball. Thycotic has  excellent service staff.  

This will be the last year Thycotic will be in operation at Healthcare in Norway because it will be replaced by CyberArk at some time this year.  

I think there are some very small things in Thycotic which are a little harder to do, and that is only because the Healthcare environment is so large. Healthcare has 55,000 network elements and 15,000 servers. One of the few things that CyberArk does better than Thycotic is to more neatly group IT assets in smaller bundles using a 'safe' that could be assigned to groups or teams for access. By comparison, Thycotic — at least in the versions leading up to the competition — lists all the assets at one time, no matter how many there are. When there are lists which are 15,000 elements long, it is harder to locate items and divvy up the work. So it was some slight usability things like this that really made the difference in the outcome of our comparison.  

While this organizational feature in Thycotic was not so good, some other parts of the user interface that are included in it are really fabulous. Thycotic is more intuitive and it is more logical in many ways than CyberArk. So I really like the Thycotic product. But for this very large environment, it turned just to be slightly less applicable to our situation than its competition.  

As I probably indicate from my answer, if it was not for the fact that we did a formal comparison and scoring of the products — following the objective measures that we have to follow when we buy things in the public — we probably would have done well just keeping Thycotic. But when you follow the Government process and the idea is to be absolutely impartial, then the way the scoring is set up is the way it goes.  

I think the pricing of Thycotic and CyberArk products are very similar.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Thycotic as probably a nine. That is only because I have to rank them slightly lower after we decided to make the switch to CyberArk, and replacing a product that is a ten would not make a lot of sense. So a nine-out-of-ten it is.  

Thycotic is a product that is so friendly that it can be used by nearly anyone and everyone, and that is a good place to be. As for the limitations in a very large environment, Thycotic could invest in making changes in the product to handle structuring in a segmented way. It would be costly for Thycotic to make that investment, but for Healthcare as a user group, that would have been the difference. We have already bought another product, so we are not going to change our minds again, but it may be worth considering for the team at Thycotic.  

I would probably recommend Thycotic for most businesses because it is simpler and easier to deal with than CyberArk. So really, I would recommend it to all businesses except for the extremely large ones.