CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault Reviews

Our primary use of this solution is as a password manager.

The interface is very simple to use.

Security-wise, CyberyberArk is better than the other products.

The pricing is too expensive and should be reduced. This is our only concern. When a small industry wants to invest in these kinds of tools, they don't have the budget to spend a lot of money on security. If the price were more reasonable then many other small businesses would consider using it.

The installation process should be easier and more user-friendly so that you don't need to hire a third party to deploy it. Instead, an in-house administrator could do it.

I have been using this product for the last two years.

Over the past two years, I hardly remember us facing any large problems. We have experienced small bugs, but they release patches to fix those.

This is a scalable product. In our company, we have about 100 users, most of which are part of our DevOps team or are administrators.

We are satisfied with the technical support.

Prior to CyberArk, we were using a Microsoft product, but it didn't fulfill our entire requirement. We adopted this new solution because it met all of our needs.

The initial setup is complex. It took two or three days to complete the deployment.

We implemented this solution with the help of consultants who had experience with it.

This product is very expensive.

I have seen demonstrations of similar products by other vendors and what I found was that the security on this solution is better.

Overall, I feel that this is a good product and I recommend it. The only thing that people have to consider is pricing.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

• Vaulting of privileged credentials. 
• Used as a jump host solution. 
• We wanted to keep passwords from being exposed to end users and connect them seamlessly to their target devices.

Our privileged accounts are now stored in a more secure location and lateral movement within the network have been lessened.

The PSM is excellent and the ability to write your own connectors and plugins is invaluable as far as flexibility goes.

• Enhanced PSM support for Java based applications.
• Easier to use bulk uploader tools (which are already being worked on).

The features that I value most are the PSM connect option, where an authorized user doesn't even require a password to open a session to perform their role. Another feature that I think is really valuable is being able to monitor a user's activity; there is always a log recording activities performed by the privileged accounts in CyberArk.

This tool has definitely helped us manage all the privilege accounts, which mostly have access to the organization's crown-jewel data. Additionally, having a monitoring system puts extra visibility on these account's activities, so any irregular activity is highlighted and quickly escalated.

I think there can be improvement in providing information on how to develop connectors for various applications’ APIs.

Additionally, I think the user experience needs to improve. It's not very intuitive at the moment. An account could be more descriptive, and could have more attributes based on its functionality.

I have used the product for almost a year. I have been part of the implementation project and post-release, supported account onboarding.

For the most part, there weren't many stability issue. Usually the issue persisted with system/application accounts, with the API and the object ref ID not being in sync.

I didn't feel there were any scalability issues.

Although I was part of business side of the team, and I only had interaction with internal engineering team, I found the internal engineering team very helpful and knowledgeable about the product and how it worked.

We previously used a different solution, and then we updated it; we did not switch.

I am unable to comment on this, as I was not part of product evaluation team.

My advice is that this tool does what it advertises. If your business/organization has crown-jewel data, this is the tool to use.

From a security standpoint, I find the tool very reliable and innovative. However, it could improve the user experience and become more intuitive. When the user experience becomes more intuitive, then I am willing to rate the product even higher.

This solution is used for managing all unmanaged and forgotten privileged accounts. DNA tool is amazing, far better than imaginable in previous years.

We are able to keep an eye on every move made by privileged accounts throughout the enterprises, and with PSM we have monitoring after hours.

CPM, which helps keep the password policy up to date. which eventually helps to maintain the GDPR data security requirements for almost every client in Europe and elsewhere. 

It is currently a robust product, but we should be able to join together small components. This will improve support and understanding.

Companies often have an enormous amount of admin credentials out there. They want to find out how many they have, start cleaning them up, and ensure they're all kept in an encrypted vault. Password Vault is probably the top product in that space, and it's a monster to implement, but CyberArk is great at what they do.

Password Vault's main advantage is its scalability. We constantly see huge enterprises implementing something like this, and the privileged session management is an excellent piece. You can kind of watch videos of whatever an admin has done. So, for example, if an admin doesn't check out their password and fires up a session on a machine, you can see playback. Scalability and those particular features are pretty valuable for monitoring your insider threat.

Our customers haven't complained about any stability issues, and we've set Password Vault up for quite a few customers. However, the stability depends on the equipment unless they do it in the cloud. But if they're setting up on a bunch of VMs, and that VM store goes down, that's not necessarily a CyberArk problem. That's more of a problem with Windows or VMware, etc., or something like that. So I guess the stability's fine.

There are upwards of six components you need to set it up. And you might need anywhere from two to five servers. It takes some work to set that up, especially in a larger environment.

On-prem CyberArk is pretty expensive. It's pricey and you get what you pay for. It's an incredible product for what it does, but it's significantly cheaper to go to the cloud.

I would rate Password Vault seven out of 10. I'd only go that low because of how challenging the installation can be. I advise our customers to consider using CyberArk's cloud option because many people just reflexively lean toward the on-prem solution. The cloud solution is considerably less expensive. It's still complex to set up the different components and make it all work together, so I suggest you make sure you need all those components. Maybe you don't even want to use everything there, but consider the cloud version. It's the same product, but it's more straightforward and cost-effective. You're not losing any functionality.

The primary use case of this solution is for third-party developers that come into our infrastructure from VPN to connect. They are organizations that are outside of our organization.

Before CyberArk, our developers would connect from the VPN directly to the jump servers to get all of their access. We have removed the jump servers to connect to CyberArk.

The security has improved. We know who is accessing and what they are doing. The access is secure. 

CyberArk has increased our security.

The most valuable feature is that it is flexible. It has many connectors. that have done well, the EPV and SSH sessions are all being recorded and everything works fine.

This solution does not support the SQL Developer. We have to purchase separately from CyberArk and we have to ask them to develop it.

This solution is a bit complex compared to other solutions. The installation and administration are complex.

Some things can be done through the interface, but the whole installation process and upgrade process can be done with the installation script but it's complex.

This is too complex for some organizations that do not have a large scale.

In the next release, they could simplify the setup and I would like some tasks added like file sharing. When a client connects to CyberArk and wants to put a file on the server, they cannot.

I thought that the client would be able to drop a file onto the server and the file would be visible on the server.

I have to disable the connection to provide a copy and this is a security issue, and I closed this file to the client then he can't upload and files to us.

They need to come up with a way for the client to file share with CyberArk.

I have been using this solution for six months.

This solution is stable. We have not had any issues.

This solution is scalable but pricey.

There are fifty users and they are developers.

I have not contacted technical support. I am not an engineer, I work for the bank and I have implemented this solution.

Previously we used Fudo and jump servers with OTP. It is not the same, but from a security perspective, it is also quite good and less expensive.

The initial setup is complex.

You need at least one engineer to manage the software. I must have dedicated people to administer it.

We worked with integrators for the installation. The first step was the installation process and the hardening. This process took two weeks to implement.

The migration process was more complex and more time-consuming.

This solution is expensive.

My advice would be to compare with other products and if they don't want such a large solution they could try Fudo or a similar solution that is easier and can scale like CyberArk.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

This solution is used primarily for privileged segment access and break-glass access. We also use it for log-on session recording and access control, where we can grant access to our key systems for ad-hoc use.

The most valuable feature is the ability to delegate access to admins when they need it. It allows us to have some kind of proof on the approval process, rather than give people standing access on a full-time basis.

I would prefer that this is a fully-managed service, rather than have to manage the software ourselves and keep it up to date. A cloud-based deployment would ultimately be better for us than an on-premises appliance.

Stability has not been a problem.

We didn't have any issues with scalability, although we only have 30 or 40 systems integrated. There were not tens of thousands.

We did not need to contact technical support.

The initial setup was not very hard, although it took a little while to get it set up. The only difficult part is making sure that it is integrated with all of the applications. If you've got Active Directory then it is easy, and pretty straightforward. If instead, you have all local accounts then it can get a lot harder, although I don't think that any other application can improve it if you've got local accounts everywhere.

The actual installation that included getting it up and running was pretty quick, taking only a couple of days. Going through all of the change management and other processes took much longer, on the order of months. The more problems there are with accounts inside the organization, the longer the deployment will take.

Our in-house team was responsible for the deployment.

The price of this solution is expensive.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to get the admins familiar with the setup. They have to learn how to get the process approved, especially in an ad-hoc scenario. The scheduled changes are ok, but the ad-hoc ones can be a little bit problematic if you don't have enough approvals ready to approve access.

If an organization can afford it then the Cyberark Enterprise Password Vault works well.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

My primary use case is the digital identity for access management of users and the configuration of passwords, or MSA, or SSO.

Password Vault's policy configuration is very good - when you receive an attack, you can segment the structure of the project in order to isolate parts or users.

Upgrading the product is very difficult, so this could be an area for improvement.

I've been using this solution for six months.

There have been a few lags when connecting with RDP, but otherwise, the stability is good.

Password Vault's scalability is good.

The technical support is very good in general but could provide more help when upgrading.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.