We performed a comparison between Sectona Privileged Access Management and WALLIX Bastion 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."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 features of Sectona Privileged Access Management include robust session monitoring for privileged users."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Sectona Privileged Access Management for protecting Privileged accounts is its built-in launcher. Additionally, the single sign-on capability is good. Sectona's session recording feature is particularly noteworthy because it utilizes minimal storage. Instead of recording entire sessions, it captures activity only when necessary, optimizing storage space."
"The interface is very simple. It doesn't need any plug-ins, just browsers that are installed at the beginning."
"Its video recording capabilities have definitely been key for us."
"WALLIX Bastion's most valuable feature is the Access Manager because you can use it and access the data center without any client VPN."
"The solution's technical support team is helpful."
"We use WALLIX Bastion to provide access and to monitor sessions."
"The support is great. They offer 24/7 support, but the specific level of support depends on your subscription. There's a weekday-only option, and a 24/7 option that covers all days of the week. They also have offices in different regions, including West Africa, so people there can easily get support. There's no need to worry about getting assistance."
"I like that it's Linux-based, and you don't need to have separate implementations, extra database licenses, or enterprise licenses. I think because it's Linux-based, it's more seamless than Windows. I also like the access manager, which I think is a super tool. Everything is browser-based, and you don't need a VPN. So, that's a great thing."
"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."
"Sectona Privileged Access Management needs to improve its stability. It needs to enhance the product's stability because of frequent updates. This is crucial for a solution like Privileged Access Management, as organizations rely on stability. When it becomes unstable, it causes panic."
"I would like to see future updates include robust support for cloud environments as organizations increasingly move towards cloud-based solutions."
"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."
"The performance of WALLIX Bastion's password manager is very low."
"WALLIX Bastion is GUI-driven, but it sometimes needs some management."
"The product doesn't have behavior analytics. They promised to develop this, but only for the cloud, not for on-premise versions."
"The password management needs improvement. Management of Access Manager should be improved as well."
"There could be more automation features for the solution."
"For me, the main issue has to do with the system performance itself."
"It would be better if I could manage multiple accounts in one place, like CyberArk. With WALLIX, you can only manage one account, and you are given a separate category. You have to click on each connection to do anything. For example, CyberArk might give three options for one connection if you want to have an interactive user-level experience. But with WALLIX, you have to click three times to get that access. Also, the biggest disadvantage of WALLIX is the reporting. I feel like it's very weak in reporting when compared to the other solutions. As a solution, they're good and stable. But they need to make their reports neater and better. Right now, we're going to the console and then pressing buttons every single time."
"Based on my experience as a sales tech person, one area of improvement could be a more unified licensing model."
More Sectona Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Sectona Privileged Access Management is ranked 17th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 4 reviews while WALLIX Bastion is ranked 9th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 8 reviews. Sectona Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8, while WALLIX Bastion is rated 7.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WALLIX Bastion writes "Offers secure identity management, privilege control, access monitoring, and risk reduction through controlled access". Sectona Privileged Access Management is most compared with ARCON Privileged Access Management and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas WALLIX Bastion is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, Fudo PAM, Delinea Secret Server and One Identity Safeguard. See our Sectona Privileged Access Management vs. WALLIX Bastion 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.
