We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management and One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix 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."They don't just stick to a base version; instead, they actively enhance and improve it based on client feedback and industry trends."
"The initial setup was very simple. There was only one server we had to setup. We needed to store all the passwords, and a secure database is used."
"Video and audio logs are there for any activities that the privileged admin carries out."
"That dashboard is okay."
"We use ARCON Privileged Access Management to monitor and record our admin users' activity."
"Logging, particularly screen recording for Windows RDP sessions. Also, command-logging for SSH sessions. This really helps us to see what commands/changes have been executed in a particular service at a given point of time, and by whom."
"The deployment process for the solution was easy...The solution's technical support team was good."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not complex at all."
"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."
"The most valuable features are session and password management."
"I'll provide feedback on additional features after the project is completed. I think it would be better to comment on that after the implementation is finished."
"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."
"It should support the SQL Always On platform with FQDN name instead of IP."
"Initially, there were some issues with .NET applications in Windows 10 systems."
"I would like for it to be dependent on Windows as opposed to Linux."
"The deployment process is a bit complex because no document is available."
"Currently, along with the upgrade of the ARCON solution, we have to consider the desktops and the endpoints from where the solution will have to be accessed. We have to upgrade those endpoints and desktops as well. So upgrades are not smooth."
"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."
"Product management should be improved."
"Privileged Access Suite's interface could be better."
"There is a new trend of not having any privileged users or accounts."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management is ranked 8th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 32 reviews while One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix is ranked 20th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 3 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8, while One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management writes "Offers good session monitoring and recording features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix writes "A reliable solution with great password and session management". ARCON Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), ManageEngine PAM360, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and Delinea Secret Server, whereas One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix is most compared with ManageEngine PAM360 and WALLIX Bastion. See our ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. One Identity Privileged Access Suite for Unix 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.
