No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 20, 2026

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)
12th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Privileged Access Suite for...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
28th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of ARCON Privileged Access Management is 2.0%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Privileged Access Suite for Unix by One Identity is 1.2%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ARCON Privileged Access Management2.0%
Privileged Access Suite for Unix by One Identity1.2%
Other96.8%
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

DS
System and DBA at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Enhanced security through session monitoring and activity recording
From an end-user point of view, it would be beneficial if the system could provide information about the last login. This would help identify if the server was accessed by me or if someone has potentially stolen my credentials. It would provide a clearer picture of whether ARCON Privileged Access Management is accessed by an authentic user.
Hicham Barnoussi - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Partner at Smpl ID
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

"One of the main benefits we've experienced is that Arcon helps us manage all our team's tasks and provides recording capabilities."
"By manually keeping the user logs, we can understand and manage all the operationalized tasks."
"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 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."
"One standout feature of ARCON is its ability to resolve lagging issues, especially noticeable in Linux environments."
"Session recording is the most valuable feature, as it covers compliance and it also covers our in-house applications."
"For that reason we introduced the PAM solution and it's working extremely well."
"It helps in managing privileged access management as well as password management, auto-discovery, and access control."
"The technical support for this solution is very good."
"Safeguard is a mature solution and is implemented by a large number of customers."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is easy to use."
"Privileged Access Suite's best feature is it's straightforward to use."
"The most valuable features are session and password management."
 

Cons

"One common problem I faced with ARCON PAM was compatibility issues with certain software versions."
"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."
"It should support the SQL Always On platform with FQDN name instead of IP, so where all the databases are managed centrally."
"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 usability should be expanded to other browsers like Chrome and Firefox."
"It would be helpful to have a "Favorites" list. For example, if I have 100 servers but I only go to 10 servers frequently, a Favorites list would allow me to go through those ten servers only."
"It should be browser-agnostic and, frankly, it is working well on Internet Explorer. It should work on popular browsers like Mozilla and Firefox."
"For certain environments, it is very bad."
"I rate the technical support a six out of ten. The technical support of One Identity depends on the case; if it is product-related, it takes quite a while, and they have to go back to the product management team."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a subscription to use this solution."
"The pricing and licensing model is very economical."
"The product is available with competitive pricing. Licensing is not complex. We calculated the license requirements by counting the number of admins and the number of devices which were going to integrate with it."
"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."
"The cost of this product is very cheap, comparatively in the global market."
"Pricing is low and licensing is flexible."
"Product pricing is based on users and connections. We did not have to pay more for additional features."
"The licensing is simple, and there are only two types licensing: device licensing and user-based licensing."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise17
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with ARCON Privileged Access Management?
From an end-user point of view, it would be beneficial if the system could provide information about the last login. This would help identify if the server was accessed by me or if someone has pote...
What is your primary use case for ARCON Privileged Access Management?
Currently, I access our server through the R-Course application, which serves as a part of RDP, Remote ( /products/remote-reviews ) Desktop. However, I connect to my RDP server through the ARCON Pr...
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. Privileged Access Suite for Unix by One Identity and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.