Fudo PAM vs One Identity Safeguard comparison

"We are convinced that Fudo PAM is better than competing products like WALLIX."

"Session recording and password management are the two main aspects."

"The main benefit of the solution is that it's very easy to set up. It only takes a couple of hours to install everything."

"it's perfect to control and administer computers in our company."

"Fudo PAM was the most flexible and intuitive interface out of all of the products in the PAM sector."

"The extensible framework for authentication is one of the most valuable features. We use an MFA plug-in and a lot of different factors, depending on what the business use-cases are. And of course, the auditing functionality is also valuable."

"One Identity Safeguard is stable and provides great performance."

"The transparent mode for privileged sessions is a very good solution."

"The solution's most valuable features are the efficiency and the quality of the recording."

"It has greatly helped improve our security posture. Safeguard has an option where it will reset passwords on service accounts, then go out to those servers where that service account is running as a service and update the password on it. That makes password changes very easy. We can regularly change passwords now and are planning on making it an annual activity, where all the people who own service accounts will go in and make sure all their passwords get changed, updated, and reset."

"It's a good solution for managing identities under OneFile for authorization."

"The system is easy to manage, as it is not a system that you will change everything all of a sudden. It evolves most of the time with customer requests."

"Safeguard has the ability to record and retrieve in the full-video format."

"The configuration is difficult."

"Fudo PAM’s scalability is not very strong."

"Professional training and certification would be great."

"The stability is not very good."

"I would like to see better server management. You have to know exactly what you're looking for to get the right server."

"Some of our users find the functionality a bit complex, and it could be made more user-friendly."

"Even though we have two nodes, there's no way to do an upgrade without taking everything completely offline. It would be nice if they could improve that."

"We have feature requests and would like to see the turnaround times on those features to be faster."

"Some of the out-of-the-box reporting isn't that rich. We spoke to our Safeguard reps who have acknowledged that some of the reporting features can certainly be improved and that we're not the only customer who has cited this. There are very little out-of-the-box reporting capabilities. You have to build the queries and the report. I believe in the next release they're going to be addressing this."

"The main thing that needs improvement is the slowness. Apart from that, the change password check-in feature also needs improvement because it is not working perfectly accurately."

"I just received a question from a customer in regards to a connection with Oracle OID. I tried to integrate Safeguard with the Oracle YAML as well as something else to manage the groups and users from a different system, like AD or LDAP. This one feature could be better. At this moment, the platform system can only use the integration with LDAP or AD. The software for research and development to create a connector to a YAML platform can be very complicated."

"There is room for improvement in the launch module. They built in a launch button but they don't have effective instructions for configuring it to allow it to launch an RDP session. They're working on that, but the button is in the live product. If they were going to install something that wasn't useful, they should have just disabled it and not rolled it out with the product."

"I would like to see support for RDP over HTTPS so this product can be used in conjunction with the Microsoft terminal."

"The pricing is great. We've been given discounts that make it cheaper than using any other solution."

"It is a bit on the pricey side, but you get what you pay for. You don't want to get anything too cheap because then you get cheap stuff and cheap support. That really never helps anybody."

"Our licensing costs are on a yearly basis."

"The full license is expensive but if you plan to use it in a big organization then it is the best option because it is more flexible."

"They have comparable pricing. All identity products are essentially priced in a similar way. It's a per-user base."

"The license is very expensive for us, partly due to inflation and partly because of the exchange rate between the Dollar and the Iranian Rial. We purchased a perpetual license that we've been using up until now, but I believe that we are not going to update it in the future. Instead, we plan to find another third-party to support us with the license, in the sense that we would have access to their license as a shared agreement."

"Its subscription cost is too much, and sometimes, it is very difficult to pitch the solution to the management for cost approval. If the cost is reduced a little bit, it would be easier. If its cost was less, many other organizations that currently cannot afford it would be able to use this technology. I'm sure many organizations around the globe are having issues with identity management, and it is a very difficult task for IT to manage privileged accounts."

"The pricing depends on our perspective, our budget, and, of course, the competitors we are taking into account."

"One Identity Safeguard is expensive and the cost goes up as we scale."