Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ARCON Privileged Access Management vs One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

ARCON Privileged Access Man...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
One Identity Privileged Acc...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
33rd
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of ARCON Privileged Access Management is 4.0%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix is 0.4%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

PRAVINKHISMATRAO - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced compliance and security through detailed action recordings
We have used ARCON Privileged Access Management for recording videos of user actions taken after logging into systems. Around thirty people, including network engineers, server engineers, and application engineers, use it in the company There hasn't been a notable financial benefit for our…
Hicham Barnoussi - PeerSpot reviewer
A reliable solution with great password and session management
The setup process depends on the environment of the customer. It's not dependent on the solution. For customers with normal use cases and scenarios, it's a straightforward implementation, but for a customer with more than one environment, they may have BeyondTrust in one environment and Safeguard in another one. When they want to consolidate later, there may be complications. It depends on the devices and assets they would like to have under their PAM solution. The standard time for implementation is four weeks. I rate the setup an eight out of ten. There needs to be a dedicated resource for maintenance.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not complex at all."
"The user interface, overall, is really good. If I have some 20 servers in my ID, I can easily see for which servers I have read-only access, for which servers I have prompt-access, and for which servers I have server admin access."
"The deployment process for the solution was easy...The solution's technical support team was good."
"It gives us a lot of comfort in terms of security level. Our infrastructure devices and servers are secured and nobody can have unauthorized access to them."
"After storing the administrator password in this password vault of the solution, the solution can automatically go and change the password based on the defined frequency with the defined complexity."
"By manually keeping the user logs, we can understand and manage all the operationalized tasks."
"With this log available, we can drill down to the activities performed by the people within our kiosk. There is a great feature where in the case of Unix servers, we have our own text-based logs. In the case of Window's server, we cannot create a text-based log, so our kiosk takes the screenshot or picture of the screen when I am working. It does this every three seconds."
"The session management capabilities are helpful. The session recording feature for system handling is good. It also eliminates the need to open many ports for end-users, simplifying access."
"The most valuable features are session and password management."
"Privileged Access Suite's best feature is it's straightforward to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is easy to use."
 

Cons

"The product is browser dependent. As of now, it only works on Internet Explorer from the client side. Admins cannot use any other browsers (Chrome, Edge, Firefox, etc.) to access the client manager online."
"The solution needs more work on the password management side of things. Password management is a big challenge for us, and I would like to improve this aspect. We're finding that BeyondTrust is better in this regard, which is why we're probably going to migrate over. It will offer better security I think."
"This product is lacking in terms of dashboarding analytics and should have user behavior analytics. It should also have better dashboarding for executive management and security managers, which this product is missing."
"The deployment process is a bit complex because no document is available."
"Currently, we can manage only the SSH or RDP connections, but there are many more devices that are present, apart from our SSH and RDP. We want all this to be part of the ARCON solution. For the password management, they should increase the pool of supported devices, they should have more connectors."
"If you take Microsoft hypervisor - which comes with its own interface, its own web layer, etc. - something like that also requires privileged IDs. As per our institution policy now, everything has to come through ARCON. We have demanded that these kind of advanced features also should be there."
"ARCON Privileged Access Management is not a user-friendly solution, and the application flow from one screen to another is very complex."
"Initially, there were some issues with .NET applications in Windows 10 systems."
"There is a new trend of not having any privileged users or accounts."
"Product management should be improved."
"Privileged Access Suite's interface could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is good value for our business. According to me, their competitors are more costly. Therefore, it is quite affordable. I find the ARCON to be much cheaper than the other products in the market."
"I definitely feel the product's pricing is a good value. It is one of the best products we have. The licensing is server-based."
"Pricing is reasonable."
"There are no major concerns with licensing because we can handle multiple servers in our kiosk system."
"The solution’s pricing is neither cheap nor expensive."
"Pricing is low and licensing is flexible."
"I am not in a position to give any financials, but whatever we have paid, it is value for money. Their licensing model is good. They have been flexible for us."
"We have a subscription to use this solution."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
56%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Retailer
3%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with ARCON Privileged Access Management?
In terms of improvements, I suggest implementing password rotation for service-based accounts, as that should be included.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

ARCON ARCOS, ARCON PAM
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RAK Bank, AXIS Bank, Reliance Capital, Kotak Life Insurance, MTS
University of East Anglia, nForce Secure, dunnhumby
Find out what your peers are saying about ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.