We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The most valuable feature of ARCON Privileged Access Management is the recording of sessions. It has all the basic features we need to fulfill our use case."
"That dashboard is okay."
"The password vault and session monitoring are useful."
"It is a scalable product."
"The automatic rotation of credentials is probably the most useful feature."
"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 automatic change of the password and Privileged Session Manager (PSM) are the most valuable features. With Privileged Session Manager, you can control the password management in a centralized way. You can activate these features in a session; the session isolation and recording. You apply the full intermediation principle. So, you must pass through CyberArk PAM to get access to the target system. You don't need to know the password, and everything that you do is registered and auditable. In this case, no one gets to touch the password directly. Also, you can implement detection and response behavior in case of a breach."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is stable."
"Its' quite stable."
"I'm no longer the product owner for PAM, but I can say that the most useful feature is the vault functionality, which keeps all your passwords secure in a digital vault."
"Managing users is difficult, so that is something that can be improved."
"There are some features lacking but they typically are added when the upgrades are released."
"The PTA could be improved. Currently, companies often have multiple domains and sometimes it's difficult to implement CyberArk in this kind of infrastructure. For example, you can add CPM (Central Policy Manager) and PSM (Privileged Session Manager and PVWA (Password Vault Web Access) for access, but if you want to add PTA (Privileged Threat Analysis) to scan Vault logs, it is difficult because this component may be adding multiple domain environments."
"They need to provide better training for the System Integrator."
"We found a lot of errors during the initial setup. They should work to improve the implementation experience and to remove errors from the process."
"The product could be easier to use. More work needs to be done on this aspect; it is not good enough yet. It also takes up a lot of server space. Sometimes we need to use up to seven servers."
"The major pain point that we have is the capacity of CyberArk due to the sheer volume of NPAs that we are managing. We are a large organization and we have hundreds of thousands of non-personal accounts to manage. We have already found out that there are certain capacity limitations within CyberArk that might introduce performance issues. From my perspective, something that would be valuable would be if the vault could hold more passwords and be more scalable."
"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."
"If there is an area that has room for improvement, it's probably working with their support and getting people on the phone. That is hard to do with most products in general, but that seems to be the difficult area. The product is fantastic, but sometimes we want somebody on the phone."
"It is very complex and difficult to set up the solution."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management is ranked 14th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 2 reviews while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 34 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management is rated 6.0, while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management writes "Support services and ease of use need to be improved, but it's priced competitively". On the other hand, 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". ARCON Privileged Access Management is most compared with Symantec Privileged Access Manager, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), whereas CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Azure Active Directory (Azure AD), WALLIX Bastion, Delinea Secret Server and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM). See our ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager report.
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.
