We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Symantec Advanced Threat Protection 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."We like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"The regulation of accounts is by far the most needed and valuable part of the application."
"Lessens the risk with privileged access."
"We have accomplished our security goals. We have two-factor authenticated and vaulted our important accounts, so people can't just steal stuff from us."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"Technical support has been very responsive in navigating challenges. It is very easy to open a ticket."
"It is very simple to use."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"You don't have to buy a separate email security platform. You can enable that using their endpoint, and I like that. You don't have to have two agents running on the same box."
"They manage to solve detection quite nicely. There is some rather elaborate detection compared to other providers."
"Real-time threat analysis is quick and takes action on threats immediately."
"What I like most about Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is its notification capability."
"All of the solution's features are quite valuable for us. We especially like the threat protection it provides."
"The most valuable feature is Click-time URL protection."
"Endpoint to network protects the line."
"The Vault's disaster recovery features need improvement."
"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."
"CyberArk PAM could greatly benefit from an under-the-hood update; integrating machine learning algorithms could provide predictive insights."
"I would love them to improve their UI customizing features."
"There is room for improvement in the availability of custom connectors on the marketplace for this solution. Additionally, their services for the CICD pipeline and ease of integration could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"The one place where we found that this product really needs to improve is the cloud. Simple integrations don't exist, even today. We don't have anything specific on CyberArk for managing, SaaS products, SaaS vendors, SaaS credentials. I understand it's a vendor-based thing and that they have to coordinate with the other vendors to be able to do that, and there are integrations coming. But these are the major places where CyberArk definitely needs to invest some more time."
"Not ideal for advanced threat protection."
"There are limits with respect to blocking files by hash value or blocking IP addresses, and these limits should be removed."
"Entire threat protection is not available for the advanced features."
"The cloud platform needs to have improvement in terms of the user interface and the different capabilities it has available. It needs to match the other leading next-gen EDR products that are available in the market. That's the reason why we are stepping away from Symantec. Their cloud environment is just generally lacking in comparison to others."
"The support has dropped down to a five out of ten."
"An improvement could be made on the reporting because then it would be easier to collect information and submit it for compliance."
"The security features need to be improved."
"There are some features that would add value to this product. One of them would be a graphical presentation of threats that the system has encountered."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Advanced Threat Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is ranked 20th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 14 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is rated 7.8. 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 Symantec Advanced Threat Protection writes "Provides end-to-end antivirus protection and has good stability ". 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 Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Check Point SandBlast Network, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Trellix Network Detection and Response. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Symantec Advanced Threat Protection report.
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.
