We performed a comparison between IBM Security Secret Server and Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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."The live recording is a very useful feature."
"What I like best about IBM Security Secret Server is its single-access console. It's also easy to manage and fulfills the requirements with the least resistance."
"As a PAM solution, Secret Server performs all the use cases in our environment."
"One of the most valuable features is scalability, and how it allows you to scale it without affecting the underlying core components."
"Stability-wise, I think it is a very good solution."
"The DB clustering is a really good benefit of using CA PAM."
"For me, it is the robust API which is the most valuable feature. This allows for low maintenance costs and allows applications to automatically connect. This is great to automate security of the DevOps pipeline for shared secrets across environments. Also, being on Linux and a virtual appliance is great."
"The two factor authentication, and the single most important capability was it supported PIV and CAC as one of the two factors. That was pretty huge for us."
"The interface is very friendly, colorful, and bold."
"It will provide us with more security."
"We know we can scale up with what we have, and we probably will not need to buy any further appliances down the road."
"We can enforce complicated password policies and very important frequent password changes."
"The product is very scalable in terms of concurrent sessions that it can handle at a time, number of device it can support, accounts that it can manage, or number of nodes that you can deploy in a cluster."
"The nonclustered index is working in an area with a problem that needs improvement."
"It would be preferable if the full proxy was included in the IBM Security Secret Server."
"What needs improvement in IBM Security Secret Server is support. The local partner provides good support, but IBM itself doesn't. Most of the time, the IBM support team does not aggressively resolve issues reported through chat or the IBM website."
"Secret Server should have the ability to discover privileged accounts in the servers, like the administrator or users, from SQL and Oracle without having to import a script."
"The newer interface is more difficult to use than the previous one, and consequently, new users might need more training."
"The response time for support could be faster. Some features should be added: cloud-based, VPN-less, more secure, and it should be adjusted in a hybrid environment."
"Instead of just giving passwords to the user based on job function, from auditing perspective, turn that cycle around. That would really help from an auditing standpoint."
"I’m no fan of Java as an application front-end, as it tends to have issues depending on what browser one’s using."
"They need to have zero tier and active-active setup with zero minimum downtime, which they are working on it. "
"The support for other remote assistance tools would be excellent. Free included tools in Windows (Remote Assist) and Microsoft SCCM Configuration Manager (ConMgr Remote Control) allow companies to reduce the amount of RDP connections and expand the usage of the tools are frequently used by companies to provide technical support for remote assistance."
"Bring more technology into the portfolio and being able to collapse those products into a much more integrated way."
"They need to do a little bit more on the mainframe side."
"They should include some assignments in the test environment to explore the product's features."
More Symantec Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security Secret Server is ranked 13th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 7 reviews while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is ranked 18th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 50 reviews. IBM Security Secret Server is rated 8.2, while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Security Secret Server writes "User-friendly, granular features, and is simple to implement, but the technical support could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Privileged Access Manager writes "Allows IT and consultants to access the infrastructure environment but needs more security and better support". IBM Security Secret Server is most compared with Delinea Secret Server, Delinea Privileged Access Service and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas Symantec Privileged Access Manager is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, ARCON Privileged Access Management and Delinea Secret Server. See our IBM Security Secret Server vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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.