We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, BeyondTrust, Delinea and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is stable."
"With CyberArk, you can be fully confident that your existing accounts are secure. You will be 100 percent"
"The password vault and session monitoring are useful."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable feature of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is privileged threat analytics."
"It has a centralized page where you can manage everything. This makes work easier. You don't have to remember different module URLs or browser applications. It is very easy to get all the secure identities of other environments into a single page, which is very important for us as it helps a lot in terms of operations, e.g., reduces management time. This is a single page where you can manage all accounts and onboard them to the CyberArk. You can then secure and see passwords from everywhere. So, there is a single pane of glass where you can manage all the identities across environments as well as across different types of identities."
"It is a robust product."
"Creating policies and the password rotation feature have been valuable. We don't have to memorize our password for the ADM account."
"FortiAuthenticator is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the OTP on the mobile phone."
"We have not had issues with Fortinet FortiAuthenticator. It is stable."
"The most valuable features are the performance and ease of use."
"I prefer the passing tool that sent an active directory console to a Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, then Fortinet FortiAuthenticator does not pass the locks."
"The product is stable and reliable."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"This is a scalable product."
"The tool’s pricing and scalability can be better."
"The initial setup has room for improvement to be more straightforward."
"They are sometimes not flexible with things. For instance, from one day to another, there might be something that had been done years ago by CyberArk, then they say, "We do not support that." You then have to initiate a complaint and start working with them. Things might become complicated and months pass while you are working with them. Usually, they are good and fast, but sometimes they seem to be blocked with problems, e.g., you will suddenly be working with another team instead of the team that you were working with the day before."
"PAM could be more user-friendly and CyberArk could update the documentation to include more real-world examples. You have to learn it yourself through trial and error. In particular, the online documentation should have more information about troubleshooting."
"The initial setup was a bit complex."
"Its pricing is a big challenge here. When it started, the product came in at a very low cost. Now, they are the leaders in the market, so the cost has grown and is quite huge."
"Currently, in Secure Connect, an end user is required to enter account information manually, and cannot save any of this information for future use."
"Some aspects of the administration need improvement, though they have recently made improvements to the API. However, the management with the interface and configuration are not so user-friendly. It has not changed much during all the years that CyberArk has been on the market. The management part, like platform management as well as PSM connectors definition and management, could be improved, even if it has already been done with the API."
"There are multiple areas that are in need of improvement. It is not a mature product."
"We've had some issues with integration."
"Lacks a simplified two-factor authentication process."
"The integration with other products, for example, some SAML authentications, would make it more flexible."
"We had issues trying to integrate the keys properly during the initial setup."
"The price of the solution could improve, it is expensive."
"The speed of deployment on the cloud could be improved. It took a few days when it should have been just two days"
"The only way the solution could be improved is if it were cheaper."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 37 reviews while Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is ranked 4th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 13 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is rated 7.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiAuthenticator writes "A reasonably priced solution that can be scaled toward different functionalities and offers flexible SMS messaging". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Azure Active Directory (Azure AD), Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and VMware Identity Manager, whereas Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is most compared with Fortinet FortiToken, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Azure Active Directory (Azure AD), Duo Security and Yubico YubiKey.
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.
