We performed a comparison between Auth0 and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has a lot of customization and out-of-the-box features."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"It has improved our organization by providing login authentication for a mobile app."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"The most valuable feature is interface application integration, but we haven't fully used it yet. We'll need it in the future for a few potential clients."
"I simply use the JWT from the client on the server side to process requests and push updated profile data to a database/queue as needed and end the process without having to persist data in the web server (sessions)."
"The most valuable feature is that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"The technical support is good."
"AIM has been a great help in automating password retrieval which removes the need for hard-coded credentials."
"All access to our servers by both staff and vendors is monitored and recorded."
"The product has allowed us to improve both the management and access to privileged credentials, while also creating a full audit trail of all activities happening within isolated sessions of all tasks and activities taking place within the solution."
"It improves security in our company. We have more than 10,000 accounts that we manage in CyberArk. We use these accounts for SQLs, Windows Server, and Unix. Therefore, keeping these passwords up-to-date in another solution or software would be impossible. Now, we have some sort of a platform to manage passwords, distribute the inflow, and manage IT teams as well as making regular changes to it according to the internal security policies in our bank."
"I find value in notifications from CyberArk when passwords fail verification and have other issues."
"The established sessions on the target systems are fully isolated and the privileged account credentials are never exposed to the end-users or their client applications and devices."
"I appreciate the ease of use for support analysts."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"In the past, there was an issue with the multi-tenant where there wasn't the ability to manage them."
"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"The tool's price should be improved."
"I would like to see better automation in granting access, better tools, more efficient tools, to be able to customize the solution that CyberArk provides."
"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 product documentation has to be more precise in certain aspects with explanations for functionality limitations along with reference material or screenshots."
"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."
"The solution could improve by adding more connectors."
"Integration with the ticketing system should allow any number of fields to be used for validation before allowing a user to be evaluated and able to access a server."
"Some of the additional features that we are looking at are in the Conjur product. I am specifically discussing key management, API Keys, and things for connecting applications in the CI/CD pipelines."
"They can do a better job in the PSM space."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auth0 is ranked 2nd in Access Management with 13 reviews while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.4, while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Auth0 writes "Provides interface application integration, but Management API needs to be improved". 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". Auth0 is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access and WSO2 Identity Server, whereas CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard. See our Auth0 vs. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.