Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs Palo Alto Networks WildFire comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.0
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager enhances security, saves costs, and automates processes for improved control over privileged accounts.
Sentiment score
7.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire efficiently prevents threats, reduces costs significantly, and integrates seamlessly for comprehensive real-time security.
The return on investment lies in improved security infrastructure, addressing over-privileged access, and reducing the risk of credential compromise, which is a major source of data breaches.
The end users have the authority to reconcile the password or verify it before using session isolation, which is one of the unique features that can be enabled through Privileged Session Manager, preventing any attacks from happening within the organization when connected with sessions through CyberArk Privileged Access Manager.
During our quantitative analysis, we estimated potential savings of one to ten million dollars a year by using a PAM solution.
The service generates a low rate of false positives, reducing the overhead of managing false positive events.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.5
CyberArk's support is improving, with overall quality appreciated but needing faster response times and better initial case handling.
Sentiment score
7.3
Palo Alto Networks WildFire support excels for large companies, with varied quality and responsiveness for others, depending on region.
CyberArk has been exceptional in coming back to us with immediate responses.
It could be forever until you talk to someone who knows what they are doing.
They are helpful, but complex issues can take a long time to resolve, which can delay solutions for urgent customer issues.
There is a lack of SLA adherence, and third-party partners do not provide prompt responses.
The service response times are aligned with standards, responding within a few hours based on the problem's criticality.
The support is quite difficult to access promptly.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is praised for its scalability, though some users face licensing and initial planning difficulties.
Sentiment score
8.2
Palo Alto Networks WildFire excels in adaptability, scalability, and seamless integration, meeting diverse organizational demands and high-performance standards.
The CPM can reportedly handle up to 50,000 accounts independently without issue.
I would rate it a ten out of ten for scalability.
They had 40,000 passwords in this one safe, and it was saving the last ten iterations of each password object. That means they had 400,000 password objects in this safe. They exceeded the limit.
Wildfire is highly scalable.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is scalable, and I give it a nine for scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is praised for stability and reliability, with most issues arising from configuration or user errors.
Sentiment score
8.4
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is highly reliable, stable, and efficient, excelling in large-scale deployments and seamless cloud integration.
Proper fine-tuning and expertise ensure the product performs well.
Overall, the stability of the solution is high.
It has a large customer base and positive feedback within my network.
 

Room For Improvement

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager requires UI improvements, expanded features, better integration, and accessible pricing for enhanced user experience.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire needs improvements in cost, user interface, ease of deployment, integration, detection capabilities, and support efficiency.
They want everything to be on the cloud, but even in the SaaS version of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, they need to deploy some servers on-premises.
We cannot generate a plug-in for web-based applications.
If they want clients to move to the cloud, they need to support them in real-time.
The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings.
The support could be improved, as it takes a while to get assistance from the vendors.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise buyers find CyberArk costly but justify it with its top-notch capabilities and comprehensive security features.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is valued for advanced security despite high costs, preferred by enterprises but challenging for smaller firms.
CyberArk is expensive compared to other products I know.
CyberArk is comparatively expensive compared to other PAM solutions, such as Delinea, especially during renewal.
CyberArk's SaaS solution is particularly expensive.
I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of affordability.
 

Valuable Features

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager excels in security with credential management, AI-enhanced threat detection, and extensive integration capabilities.
WildFire offers sandboxing, App-ID, and automation, excelling in threat detection with real-time updates and seamless integration.
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager helps ensure data privacy because we now know who is using which credentials and at what time.
It keeps a record of activities, allowing me to easily fetch screen recordings to detect any misuse and see who did what and what happened.
It can integrate with Splunk, SNMP, and other solutions and technologies.
Integrating Palo Alto Networks WildFire with various security protocols similar to a firewall has significantly improved the overall threat detection capabilities in our organization.
The most valuable feature of Wildfire is its sandboxing capability for examining suspicious files or locations.
 

Categories and Ranking

CyberArk Privileged Access ...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
221
Ranking in other categories
User Activity Monitoring (1st), Enterprise Password Managers (2nd), Privileged Access Management (PAM) (1st), Mainframe Security (2nd), Operational Technology (OT) Security (3rd)
Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Network Security Systems solutions, they serve different purposes. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is designed for Privileged Access Management (PAM) and holds a mindshare of 18.3%, down 22.8% compared to last year.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire, on the other hand, focuses on Advanced Threat Protection (ATP), holds 12.3% mindshare, up 12.4% since last year.
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

Lasantha Wijesinghe - PeerSpot reviewer
We have visibility and control through real-time user behavior analytics
It took us some time to realize its benefits because there was a learning curve for us. It took us about a year to get our heads around this product and start effectively using it. It is a journey. It takes at least five years for any company to make this product very useful and reach maturity. It is not only the product's fault. The company needs to have a vision, and the company culture needs to go with it. Senior leadership needs to support the vision. You need to have lots of ingredients for success. If everything is in place, you will see success after one year. In the first year, it is a struggle for everybody. My company was bought by a bigger company, and they were very new to privileged access management. Everybody was struggling. The advice I would give is to have a good vision for privileged access management. You need dedicated teams, senior management support, and proper company policies and standards before implementing the solution. Start building knowledge slowly and avoid jumping into the deep end without preparation. I would rate CyberArk Privileged Access Manager a nine out of ten.
AjayKumar17 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced cybersecurity with advanced sandboxing and effective in controlling DNS issues
Improvements are needed in the UI part. The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings. This information should be integrated with the Dashboard so that system admins can see what is happening. Furthermore, technical support needs a lot of improvement, particularly in terms of responsiveness and adhering to service level agreements.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
850,671 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
33%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Sailpoint IdentityIQ compare with CyberArk PAM?
We evaluated Sailpoint IdentityIQ before ultimately choosing CyberArk. Sailpoint Identity Platform is a solution to manage risks in cloud enterprise environments. It automates and streamlines the m...
What do you like most about CyberArk Privileged Access Manager?
The most valuable features of the solution are control and analytics.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager?
With the current model of licensing, for my use cases, sometimes it's hard to convince the management and get budget approvals for it. It's expensive and you're not getting anything new. It's just ...
How does Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks Wildfire?
The Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall is a very powerful and very complex piece of anti-viral software. When one considers that fact, it is all the more impressive that the setup is a fairly straightf...
Which is better - Wildfire or FortiGate?
FortiGate has a lot going for it and I consider it to be the best, most user-friendly firewall out there. What I like the most about it is that it has an attractive web dashboard with very easy nav...
How does Cisco ASA Firewall compare with Palo Alto's WildFire?
When looking to change our ASA Firewall, we looked into Palo Alto’s WildFire. It works especially in preventing advanced malware and zero-day exploits with real-time intelligence. The sandbox featu...
 

Also Known As

CyberArk Privileged Access Security, CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rockwell Automation
Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
850,671 professionals have used our research since 2012.