We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Sectona Privileged Access Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."CyberArk is a very stable product and it's a stable product because it has a simple design and a simple architecture that allows you to leverage the economies of scale across the base of your infrastructure that you already have implemented. It doesn't really introduce any new complex pieces of infrastructure that would make it that much more difficult to scale."
"You can easily manage more than 4000 accounts with one PSM."
"AIM has been a great help in automating password retrieval which removes the need for hard-coded credentials."
"The most valuable feature is Special Monitoring."
"We also use CyberArk’s Secrets Manager. Because AWS is the biggest area for us, we have accounts in AWS that are being rotated by CyberArk. We also have a manual process for the most sensitive of our AWS accounts, like root accounts. We've used Secrets Manager on those and that has resulted in a significant risk reduction, as well."
"On the EBB user side, we were able to secure all the server root passwords and admin for Windows. This was a big win for us."
"All of the features of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are valuable."
"CyberArk PAM can be easily automated."
"The most valuable features of Sectona Privileged Access Management include robust session monitoring for privileged users."
"A key factor for my company is support, and Sectona Privileged Access Management has good support. Another valuable feature of Sectona Privileged Access Management is that it's easy to onboard."
"The most valuable feature is the risk management. When a Privileged user performs a certain command, such as running a script, the system highlights it in the risk management section as high, critical, or medium risk."
"They need to provide better training for the System Integrator."
"The solution could improve by adding more connectors."
"There is a learning curve when it comes to planning out the deployment strategy, but once it is defined, it runs itself."
"The lead product has a slow process. There are some reports and requirements from CyberArk which are not readily available as an applicable solution. We have made consistent management requests in the logs."
"Tech support staff can be more proactive."
"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."
"It's hard to find competent resellers/support."
"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."
"I would like to see future updates include robust support for cloud environments as organizations increasingly move towards cloud-based solutions."
"Sectona needs to think about SaaS solutions and cloud use cases. For example, we need to be able to integrate Sectona PAM with next-generation applications such as Docker and Lambda, as well as ITD pipelines that use privileged user data."
"As I don't have at least one to two years of experience with Sectona Privileged Access Management, I cannot share areas for improvement in the solution. To me, Sectona Privileged Access Management has reasonable pricing, but it could still be improved. I'm also unsure if Sectona Privileged Access Management could cover the requirements of large-sized companies, but for small-sized to medium-sized companies, I'd recommend the solution."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sectona Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while Sectona Privileged Access Management is ranked 17th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 3 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Sectona Privileged Access Management 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 Sectona Privileged Access Management writes "Effective risk management, feature of recording all privileged user activities in a compressed format but limited SaaS capability". 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 Sectona Privileged Access Management is most compared with ARCON Privileged Access Management. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Sectona Privileged Access Management report.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
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.
