We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Netgate pfSense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."The most valuable feature is Special Monitoring."
"Our go-to solution for securing against the pass the hash attack vector and auditing privileged account usage."
"What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users."
"The regulation of accounts is by far the most needed and valuable part of the application."
"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."
"We have been able to manage application credentials in CyberArk, whether they come as a custom plugin or straight out-of-the-box."
"The password management feature is valuable."
"We've written over a hundred custom connectors ourselves that allow us to do all types of privileged session management for various applications. On top of that, the rest of the API-based central credential providers allow us to get away from credentials that may be hard-coded in the script or some application."
"I especially like the VPN part. It works like a charm."
"I can manage it easily by myself."
"The most valuable features are the VPN and the capture photo."
"It has a good web cache. I used to use a DHCP server and DNS server. For my company, I use pfSense as a load balancing application."
"I mostly like all of it. Whatever we use is valuable."
"Content protection, content inspection, and the application level firewall."
"What I like about pfSense is that it works well and runs on an inexpensive appliance."
"I like the connectivity to the open VPN. It's very smooth."
"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."
"One of our current issues is a publishing issue. If we whitelist Google Chrome, all the events of Google Chrome should be gone. It is not happening."
"I would like easier integrations for creating an online dashboard that executives would look at or are able to run reports from the tool."
"The authentication port is available in CyberArk Alero but not Fortinet products."
"They need to provide better training for the System Integrator."
"More than the product itself, there is room for improvement in the documentation. The documentation should be very detailed and very structured. It has a lot of good information, on one level, but I feel that it could be more elaborate and more structured."
"One of the main things that could be improved would be filtering accounts on the main page and increasing the functionality of the filters. There are some filters on the side which are very specific, but I feel there could be more."
"The current user interface is a little dated. However, I hear there are changes coming in the next version."
"ClamAV AntiVirus can cause some crashes. That service should be improved."
"pfSense has some limitations in detecting site sessions. We want to control internet usage based on sites and their content, and pfSense doesn't perform this function."
"The main problem with pfSense is that we have to use proxy solutions."
"The integration could be improved."
"The user interface can be improved to make it easier to add more features. And pfSense could be better integrated with other solutions, like antivirus."
"The GUI could use more “bells and whistles”. It's got plenty of info for a Sysadmin but some people like shiny things."
"More documentation would be great, especially on new features because sometimes, when new features come out, you don't get to understand them right off the bat. You have to really spend a lot of time understanding them. So, more documentation would be awesome."
"It was difficult to configure our web printer through the solution. This process could be easier. Additionally, integration with SD-WAN solution."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard, whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, KerioControl and Sophos UTM.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.