We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Keeper based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."CyberArk has been easy for us to implement and the adoption has been good. We've been able to standardize a bunch of things. We've been able to standardize relatively easily with the use of the platforms and managing the policies."
"Central Password Manager is useful for agentless automated password management through AD integration as well as endpoints for different devices."
"We are maintaining compliance in PCI, SOX and HIPPA, which is a big thing. Auditors really like it, and it has made us stay compliant."
"The threat analytics is an important feature."
"What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is privileged threat analytics."
"We are able to rotate credentials and have privileged account access."
"Password sharing and SSO. These features almost become a necessity to make sure that company data is safe and reduce the possibility of data breach."
"I like the tool's keyword editor and SSO."
"Keeper Bridge."
"The installation and its use are very simple."
"It has a secure password generator that incorporates random creation tools and good security practices, which allows for an easy, quick, organized update and sharing with a work team."
"Possibility to login using the fingerprint sensor on Android/iPhone."
"I like a couple of things about this solution. Being able to share passwords with other people is valuable. You can see if the information is out on the dark web and whether you have weak passwords and the last time they were changed. You could also have the 2FA or MFA codes embedded in the application so that you don't have to use your phone or any other 2FA device, which is something very important."
"The generator of complex passwords keeps me safe from being hacked."
"Having a centralized place to manage the solution has been something that I have always wanted, and they are starting to understand that and bring things back together."
"We'd like to see the creation of some kind of memo field for each device account, which could be used, in our network at least, to leave a note about the device for either the security or network engineering team members."
"It should be easy to use for non-technical people. Its interface can be a bit difficult. Some parts of its interface are not very intuitive. Some of the controls are hidden, and instead of having a screen with all the controls for that account on it, you have to use menus and other similar things."
"There was a functionality of the solution that was missing. I had noticed it in Beyond Trust, but not in this solution. But, recently they have incorporated something similar."
"When I was a component owner for PAM's Privileged Threat Analytics (PTA) component, what I wanted was a clear mapping to the MITRE ATT&CK framework, a framework which has a comprehensive list of use cases. We reached out to the vendor and asked them how much coverage they have of the uses cases found on MITRE, which would have given us a better view of things while I was the product owner. Unfortunately they did not have the capability of mapping onto MITRE's framework at that time."
"There is a bit of a learning curve, but it's a pretty complex solution."
"CyberArk has a lot on the privileged access side but they have to concentrate more on the application side as well."
"It can be made user-friendly, in the sense of the console is pretty outdated."
"Room for improvement in my eyes would be being able to share my credit cards and other types of information. The only thing they really share is passwords, and you can only do it with one password at a time. When you're trying to share it out or trying to remove it from being shared, you can't do multiple selections."
"I would add a category for personal documents or photos of ID cards."
"Keeper does not provide password management for mobile apps."
"The technical support for this solution could be faster support and improved if they had a better understanding of my questions."
"The technical support has no experience."
"Ability to set up password profiles that can predefine custom fields and password complexity."
"Search functions are sometimes weird."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while Keeper is ranked 10th in Enterprise Password Managers with 32 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Keeper is rated 9.2. 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 Keeper writes "It's an inexpensive, scalable solution that has improved our security". 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, whereas Keeper is most compared with HashiCorp Vault, Azure Key Vault, LastPass, Delinea Secret Server and AWS Secrets Manager.
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.
