We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management SaaS and WALLIX Bastion 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 tool's architecture is thin and scalable. We also like the product's ease of deployment. My company is also impressed with the solution's number of connectors."
"The support is great. They offer 24/7 support, but the specific level of support depends on your subscription. There's a weekday-only option, and a 24/7 option that covers all days of the week. They also have offices in different regions, including West Africa, so people there can easily get support. There's no need to worry about getting assistance."
"WALLIX Bastion's most valuable feature is the Access Manager because you can use it and access the data center without any client VPN."
"The interface is very simple. It doesn't need any plug-ins, just browsers that are installed at the beginning."
"The solution's technical support team is helpful."
"Its video recording capabilities have definitely been key for us."
"I like that it's Linux-based, and you don't need to have separate implementations, extra database licenses, or enterprise licenses. I think because it's Linux-based, it's more seamless than Windows. I also like the access manager, which I think is a super tool. Everything is browser-based, and you don't need a VPN. So, that's a great thing."
"The tool needs to improve its pricing."
"The product doesn't have behavior analytics. They promised to develop this, but only for the cloud, not for on-premise versions."
"The performance of WALLIX Bastion's password manager is very low."
"For me, the main issue has to do with the system performance itself."
"The password management needs improvement. Management of Access Manager should be improved as well."
"It would be better if I could manage multiple accounts in one place, like CyberArk. With WALLIX, you can only manage one account, and you are given a separate category. You have to click on each connection to do anything. For example, CyberArk might give three options for one connection if you want to have an interactive user-level experience. But with WALLIX, you have to click three times to get that access. Also, the biggest disadvantage of WALLIX is the reporting. I feel like it's very weak in reporting when compared to the other solutions. As a solution, they're good and stable. But they need to make their reports neater and better. Right now, we're going to the console and then pressing buttons every single time."
"Based on my experience as a sales tech person, one area of improvement could be a more unified licensing model."
"There could be more automation features for the solution."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management SaaS Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management SaaS is ranked 15th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 1 review while WALLIX Bastion is ranked 9th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 7 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management SaaS is rated 10.0, while WALLIX Bastion is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management SaaS writes "Helps to manage human, digital and machine identities ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WALLIX Bastion writes "Offers secure identity management, privilege control, access monitoring, and risk reduction through controlled access". ARCON Privileged Access Management SaaS is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas WALLIX Bastion is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, Fudo PAM, One Identity Safeguard and Delinea Secret Server.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
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.
