Idira Privileged Access Manager Reviews

It is nothing but privileged access management. Most companies have servers, and for each server, they identify a generic ID to login. For example, if someone is an administrator, they will be using that ID to log in. So, we need to manage those IDs in a common repository, and that is why we have CyberArk PAM. CyberArk PAM is nothing but a common repository used to store passwords and manage them.

Managing passwords is a pain area in any organization. By using this tool, we have a set of policies and emerging technology where we manage these passwords.

It is a central repository. Therefore, if someone needs to access a server, then they go through CyberArk PAM. It provides a secure way to do this and CyberArk PAM records everything. For example, if you are connecting to a Linux server, then once you get into the Linux server and if it is integrated with CyberArk, it will automatically start recording everything that is being done. In most banks, seeing the recordings is very useful. If there are any gaps or something has happened which shouldn't have happened, then we can check the logs and videos. So, it gives security, in a robust manner, to the organization.

We have connected all the endpoints in our organization's servers. This has been an improvement. We are trying to connect any new servers being added into the organization to CyberArk PAM.

When it comes to PAM, it is always about compliance. It has a feature that enables you to access the password in a very secure way using encryption. You also need multiple approvals. For example, if you have access to CyberArk, it doesn't mean that you have access to the server. So, whenever you try to access that server, a request will go to your manager. Once he approves the request, only then will you be able to access the server. These are a few of the features that I like about this solution.

CyberArk PAM provides ease of access based on how they have designed it. It is clearly defined where you have to go and what you have to do. If you are an end user, it is very easy to use and provides a comfort level.

CyberArk PAM is able to find all pending servers that can be integrated, but we cannot get this as a report. We can only see the list of servers on CyberArk PAM. This is a problem that could be improved.

If you are an administrator or architect, then the solution is kind of complicated, as it is mostly focused on the end user. So, they need to also focus on the people who are implementing it.

I started using CyberArk PAM in 2016, so it has been almost six to seven years. I started with version 9, and now it is currently on version 12. So, I have used multiple versions of CyberArk.

Its scalability is good. It is available on-premise and they started having a cloud three or four years back.

Our environment is very small. We are managing around 2,000 users. Whereas, I have seen it managing users of 10,000 to 15,000 servers. We have around 30,000 users, and I have seen that kind of environment, though what I am currently managing is much less. When it comes to the Middle East, it is always regionally focused, it is not international. Our organization is specific to one country and not international.

The technical support is from the US. The only problem is that they reply during their own time zone. It has been a bit difficult to reach them, but we get the answers, they are just a bit delayed.

We previously had Hitachi ID PAM. We switched to CyberArk because of the features and interface, where there is a bit of distinct difference between the two solutions. Though, the architecture is the same.

When you do an implementation, it is always challenging internally. While the setup is very easy because they give you tools for installation, you have certain things that you need to keep in mind when you implement it in an organization. These things become a kind of a roadblock. Every time that something comes up that you need to enable from the organization's side, e.g., if you have to unlock a few things on the organization's side, you must go through a process and some teams might not allow you to go ahead with it.

The deployment took three to six months.

For the deployment, we needed a solution architect, two consultants, and two people to work on the BAU. While it depends on your organization's size, we needed around five to 10 people to implement it. 

The ROI depends upon a company's capability to maximize the usage of this application. If you buy something, it is your responsibility to use it at an optimal level.

Previously, the pricing was very meager. They started publicizing and advertising the solution, growing CyberArk, as an organization. They also changed their pricing with that growth, e.g., the pricier the product, the more people who will purchase it.

Bomgar was one of its competitors, now it is called BeyondTrust. Another competitor was Thycotic. 

While CyberArk PAM has survived, it needs to be more flexible. They are currently focusing on the solution's GUI, but rather than the GUI, they need to focus on the solution's internal aspects, e.g., making the steps a bit easier. There are too many things to focus on and be aware of. So, they need to streamline it in a way where it is more compact.

You need to know the sizing of your company and not randomly use it, thinking you may need to use this solution in the future. You need to use most of the features, e.g., if you have 10 features, then your company should use at least seven features of CyberArk. If you are not going to use seven or more features, i.e., if it is below seven, you should not go for this tool.

We were using Secrets Manager for managing a few SSH files, but we are not using it anymore.

I would rate this solution as eight out of 10. CyberArk is a solution to problems being faced by multiple companies and organizations. It removes security threats and vulnerabilities from an organization in a secure way, and your credentials are handled in a secure way. Therefore, it solves this pain area in a company, and that is why I think they are one of the top tools.

We mainly use it to protect servers from inappropriate access and ransomware.

We started with on-prem solutions years ago. Our most recent implementations were done in data centers and the cloud. However, we are not in the cloud for CyberArk.

It is a really valuable tool. From the very beginning of my career in cybersecurity, I found that CyberArk is one of the best solutions that I could recommend to our customers. While it is usually seen as an access and identity management solution, it is a cybersecurity and cyber defense tool from my colleague's and my point of view.

It is a single tool that isolates possible kinds of malware. You get lateral movement blocking and auditing information, e.g., you know who is doing what. You are getting protections from the service as well as a useful environment. All your admins can easily go in and out of your company while accessing your servers in a secure way, even if they are working abroad.

One of the best points is that it gives you full control for all the use cases in your infrastructure, in terms of servers, applications, social networks, batch processes, etc. 

It gives you the ability to know what is happening, who is executing everything, and recover that information over time. Everything is recorded there. This is useful, not only for auditing proposes, but for admins and users. This also helps with troubleshooting. For instance, an application or system starts failing at 4:30 in the morning on a Sunday. Usually, the first questions that you ask yourself is, "What changed at 4:30? What has happened? Who was touching that server?" WIth CyberArk, you have the ability to search for that information and find it in minutes. It is really useful for troubleshooting.

The PPA from CyberArk provides a lot of information about access and allows for possible detection of fraudulent use or different tries of accessing, even for family Internet users. Thus, it gives you another source of information regarding risk.

We are using Secrets Manager with some of our customers. We are using it mainly for containers and DevOps. This secure access is really important, and becoming more important every day. We are constantly moving customers to the cloud. Every day, containers are more important for our customers as they extend into microservices, etc. 

The possibility to integrate with the DevOps cycle is vital right now. Sometimes, containers are deployed while some clients have them very protected. They have a lot of things with Panorama, Microsoft, etc. That is a risk because you are deploying things quickly, along with errors and other things that you are developing. So, having to use hard-coded passwords here would be a big mistake. 

Secrets Manager accelerates a lot of the possibilities and simplifies the process, since development teams just need to use credentials. When they arrive on a project, there are new people or resources in their development teams. Thanks to CyberArk, they just need to manage their identities to have access to everything. They don't need to receive credentials nor search for them. They have everything the day that they start working.

We find it easy to use CyberArk PAM to implement least privilege entitlements. We usually do some interviews at the very beginning with different teams to understand their real needs. We define saves and different AV groups for the kind of users that we are going to prepare. Then, the process to assign permissions to different groups is really easy and straightforward. If you want to change or reduce access, that can be easily changed at any moment.

I have been using it for more than 10 years.

In the last year, it has been a very stable platform.

Scalability is fantastic. It has been really easy to scale. In fact, most of our customers who start, or have doubts about how to start, we propose to them, "Well, if you are not sure or don't have the budget right now, you can start with a small deployment, then we will grow." It easily grows and you can add components. 

Other customers have started with a small CPD deployment, then replicated. We put high availability on another CPD. It is really good for public clouds.

We have some customer environments that are over 10,000 servers as well as some environments with more than 50,000 managed identities.

I would rate their technical support as eight out of 10. They are usually really good and quick about answering any questions that you raise. However, they are sometimes not flexible with things. For instance, from one day to another, there might be something that had been done years ago by CyberArk, then they say, "We do not support that." You then have to initiate a complaint and start working with them. Things might become complicated and months pass while you are working with them. Usually, they are good and fast, but sometimes they seem to be blocked with problems, e.g., you will suddenly be working with another team instead of the team that you were working with the day before.

Positive

I have been working with CyberArk and with the CyberArk teams for years. They have been able to adapt the solutions that they have developed or bought. They have grown a lot with the acquisition of different companies. They have been able to adapt them, make them valuable, and helpful.

The initial setup is straightforward because we have a lot of experience with it. While there are a lot of components, I don't find it difficult.

A deployment can typically be done in less than a week, but it does depend on the environment.

We have developed our own methodology for the implementation and deployment of CyberArk. We put the final users at the center of their strategy. One of the things that we have found that fails when deploying a PAM solution is that everyone focuses on the tool. CyberArk works and we know the tool is there, so we just focus on how the different groups are working with their servers, applications, etc. We focus on adapting the deployment in a way that does not disrupt their jobs. We try to be non-disruptive and not change the way users work.

We adapt the solution to already existing workflow processes, tools, accesses, etc. This is one of the best parts of CyberArk. It provides a lot of flexibility to adapt.

The main problem for the tool is its licensing. I work for a really big company. When you try to develop this as a service, usually you work with leverage teams who are formed with dozens of members. You might dedicate one FTE, or less, for something, e.g., an antivirus administrator. You might have half an FTE's effort dedicated to administering the antivirus, but then you have a team of about 30 users who might access that ticket. The problem is that CyberArk eliminated the possibility of concurrent users years ago. This is a big problem for companies who work with leverage teams.

You need to pay for everyone. 40 licenses are used by 20 or 30 people. This is a big problem because licenses are not precisely cheap.

It provides the broadest point of view for privileged access management solutions in the market. We have tested several other proposals and tools for our customers and ourselves. There is a huge difference with using CyberArk.

We evaluated CA PAM and another solution. The main difference is that they cover just a part of the solution. They promise the solution will be very simple to deploy because they only have a simple appliance. However, they are actually really difficult to deploy for an entire project as well as give you value. We have experienced a lot of support and integration problems. You need to do a lot of things by yourself. Whereas, in CyberArk, you have plenty of plugins and developed material in the marketplace. 

This is the big difference at the moment. When you are deploying, it seems like a very simple project, and the other solutions will tell you, "Well, it's just an appliance," and then it becomes a nightmare. Whereas, CyberArk does what it does. You need to deploy several servers, but it works.

From time to time, people in the market are like, "Wow, it was born as a cloud-native solution." Sometimes, this is real and means something, but usually it is mostly a marketing thing. Why would we ignore all a solution's previous experience just for something born in the cloud? Most of the IT solutions that we use in the cybersecurity market are not born in the cloud. For instance, if you go with Securonix or Sentinel, there is a huge difference in the way they were conceived and the way they were born. Just because something is cloud-native or new doesn't mean that it is good. I wouldn't go for something that is cloud-native, just because it is.

I would rate CyberArk as nine out of 10. I won't give the 10 because I have my problems with the licensing. However, the solution is completely recommendable and a must-have in every environment.

We are mostly rotating passwords and using PSM for remote connections.

It provides us with better security and control over our accounts.

It provides an automated and unified approach for securing access for all types of identities. This approach is important for us. The more things we have that can be automated, the easier it is to get things done.

It gives a single pane of glass to manage and secure human and machine identities across environments, which is important for us.

It saves time when it comes to onboarding new employees and providing them secure access to SaaS apps and IT systems. It probably saves a couple of hours.

The automatic rotation of credentials is probably the most useful feature.

It should be easy to use for non-technical people. Its interface can be a bit difficult. Some parts of its interface are not very intuitive. Some of the controls are hidden, and instead of having a screen with all the controls for that account on it, you have to use menus and other similar things.

Its documentation could be better. Some of the documentation lacks details for people who aren't super technical.

I have been using this solution for about six years.

It is stable. We never had any hiccups that were caused by CyberArk.

It is easily scalable. In terms of usage, it is being used by all of IT. We have over 500 users utilizing the solution. We're always adding new people and features, so its usage is increasing every day. We plan to implement more types of accounts. 

Their technical support is good, but some of their documentation lacks details for people who aren't super technical. I would rate them an eight out of 10.

Other than the regular Password Manager, they didn't have any real solution. They chose to look into CyberArk because it is a good security practice to have accounts automatically rotate and secure remote connections.

It is pretty complex, but they have professional services to help with that. It is complex because of all the security around it, all the hardening, and getting everything set up to communicate with each other. I am not sure about the duration of the initial deployment because I wasn't on the team then.

In terms of maintenance, it doesn't require a lot of people. Maintenance is just keeping up with patches. It is pretty stable and doesn't require a lot.

We used CyberArk's professional services. They were good, and they helped get everything set up. They also helped do upgrades.

It is in line with its competitors, but all such solutions cost too much money.

It is a good choice. I'm not sure if they're the market leader or not, but they seem to have the biggest footprint. I know there are a couple of competitors, but I've never used them. The other two that I know about are not as widely used, so there is a bigger community for support for CyberArk, and there is also CyberArk's support.

CyberArk is good as a technology partner for ensuring that we maintain a strong security posture throughout our digital transformation. It is a needed platform to have.

Given my experience with CyberArk PAM, to a colleague at another company who says, “We want to solve cloud security challenges with born-in-the-cloud security solutions as opposed to legacy solutions that have been adapted to the cloud," I would say that CyberArk is a good option for the cloud. That's because you don't have to worry about maintenance, and all the integrations are already in place. The different accounts that CyberArk can integrate with are already in place.

It doesn't really give a single pane of glass to manage and secure identities across multiple environments. It only gives visibility into CyberArk and how the accounts are working there. If something is wrong with an account, sometimes, you have to check other tools, such as Active Directory, or permissions.

We don't use CyberArk’s Cloud Entitlements Manager and Secrets Manager. We use CyberArk PAM to implement least privilege entitlements, and it is neither easy nor difficult to implement them. It is somewhere in the middle. The adoption of least privilege entitlements by using CyberArk PAM is also somewhere in the middle. If users aren't really technical, they would have problems with it.

It provides consistent controls to enable secure access, manage secrets, and implement least privilege at scale across our environment. It is somewhat user-friendly for people to just rotate passwords. Its interface can be a bit difficult.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

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.

We primarily use the product as part of the growing security posture of the company.

The solution provided password management and API password retrieval functionality. 

The most valuable aspects of the solution include password management and Rest API retrieval of vaulted credentials. 

The solution needs better features for end users to manage their own whitelisting for API retrieval. 

I've used the solution for over a decade. 

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.

We use the solution for privileged access to internal systems and multiple customer environments.

We have distributed PSM and CPM components throughout multiple sites and customer domains access over the VPN, with PSM load balancing handled via third-party hardware load balancers. 

Environment segregation and security are high on the criteria for the implemented solution, however, not at the overall expense of performance. 

We tend towards providing access to privileged admin applications direct from the PSM servers wherever suitable, yet offload additional workloads to siloed RDS collections if the need arises. 

I appreciate the ease of use for support analysts. We provide a single pane of glass access to our analysts where segregated admin access is provided via safe access groups. The overall goal is to provide the analysts with just enough access to function without being totally impaired by security constraints. With the piece of mind that the auditing and recording capabilities allow. We provide access to fully managed systems via distributed PSMs, or where the need arises we can provide access to online third-party access points via a central pool of web-enabled PSMs.

The most important feature is the password rotation and recording to align with customer security requirements.

The reporting and auditing functions allow us to provide evidence-based accounting to customers or security personnel when or if required. Being able to prove that "it does what it says on the tin" is a very key selling point or point scorer in project and planning sessions.

The marketplace default connectors are constantly evolving and simplifying administration. In the case of one not being available then the majority of additional requests can be catered for with some clever AutoIT scripting.

Remediation of some of the platform settings in the master policies section would be handy.

Overall what I would really love to see is the third-party PAS reporter tool pulled more into the overall solution, ideally as its own deployable component service installation package, that could be installed/branded alongside the PVWA service, and build out API integration so that third party calls could draw valuable data directly out of the management backend with very little amount of additional admin overhead.

I've used the solution for eight years. 

The solution is very stable; if instability is ever experienced it is likely to be as a result or symptom of a problem elsewhere, such as external factors (updates, network etc.).

The solution is fairly scalable, although depending on how far and wide you stretch your footprint, you may be better suited to multiple smaller vaults and component environments, than one large pot.

Initial call logging can be tedious at times. If you clearly articulate an issue yet are then required to collate entirely irrelevant logging information or jump through a default set of "have you tried this" questions it can cause frustration. Call escalation via account management has improved and when needed we have then progressed with support at a faster pace.

Positive

I have not worked with a solution with a focus explicitly for PAM.

The initial setup was both straightforward and complex in equal measure.

The majority of the setup was in-house. On occasion, we have engaged the vendor team and always had a positive outcome.

I'm not in the loop to be able to answer to ROI.

Engage with Cyberark account management and professional services to fully understand your current, expected, and future requirements. 

Some default settings applied early on may be very time-consuming to amend at a later date (for example, set a default attribute in a platform, extrapolate that platform out to 300 other platforms and a single change may then have to be retrofitted 300 times). So the more scope you can define at deployment the better.

I believe other vendors were evaluated prior to selecting CyberArk.

I'd advise other users to take their time, measure twice, and cut once.

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.

We use it for other use cases, such as automating application authorization, managing files, and securing monetary accounts. We use it for managing privileged accounts.

I like everything about it. It's secure and reliable. I especially appreciate that it's locked down and only allows access to authorized components.

The issue is that in many environments, what I purchase via text is different. We have some policies that are specific to Microsoft environments. For example, my actual manager may not be able to connect to a Microsoft product due to a policy on it. The issue that comes to mind now is how six credentials are managed.

Currently, if you try to log in to any server within the environment, you would need to log in every time, regardless of whether you have already received the credential or if the connecting device is present or not. It is a problem with CyberArk. If CyberArk could find a way to solve this, it would greatly improve the experience.

I'm not sure if it is possible to fix this. It's not a point of entry, but it may require a longer string than the user might want to know, or maybe cheaper right now. If CyberArk can find a solution that improves the experience, it would be beneficial to customers.

Another thing is that there are some time needs that could be improved in the future. One thing that could be improved is to create of a better alternative for fixing group policy fees. We currently use Microsoft, but they have introduced new policies that may not be compatible.

I've been working with it for three years. I'm currently working with version 12 of the solution, and I've also worked with version 10 and partition 11.

The number of users is about 3,305, and it is stable. We don't have any small clients, mainly medium and enterprise businesses.

I would rate stability a ten out of ten, and it's very stable.

I would rate scalability an eight out of ten. It's not perfect, but it's fairly scalable.

Some things need improvement. The solution doesn't provide sufficient support. I contacted them at one point, but it took several months to get a response. Additionally, we had an issue with account balances that took a while to resolve. That was four or five years ago, though. Other than that, it's a decent solution.

Positive

Regarding the initial setup, I would say it's pretty straightforward on a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy. I'd give it a nine. Deployment took less than a week.

I deployed the solution.

It is pretty pricey. I would rate it a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is very expensive.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.

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.