CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Reviews

We use it for storing and rotating passwords.

Within our organization, a lot of people are using this solution for a lot of projects. We have already implemented CyberArk as a SaaS solution. We are not using the core parts, but we are using the software as a service for a project.

At my previous job, there was a team of seven people who were in charge of maintenance. Mostly analysts, senior analysts, and a technical lead used this solution. 

It completely depends on the requirement. For some of the RPA robotic types of user identity, we prefer for it to happen in an automatic way, but some of them are highly critical, so we don't do it automatically. As for the end-user experience or expectation, if they want to change it at their end, they can do it.

I don't see any problems because it's highly secure and very flexible. It gives us all types of storage options and it gives us a high level of security. From my experience, overall, I don't see many problems that need to be rectified.

The only problem involves granting access to people who are authorized to view it. This user management area is the most critical. We have to constantly check on that area and we have to review and give proper access. Nobody should have more access than they are authorized for.

I have been using CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault for eight years.

It's scalable at the component level. If you want to add some of the latest components, or if you want to implement biometrics or MFA, this solution can handle that — it's very easy to implement.

The tech support is amazing. If you have any issues that you need help with, the CyberArk support team reaches out very quickly, depending on the criticality of the issue. If it's critical, they will reach out to you within hours.

The vendor support is really good.

The initial setup is quite straightforward. These days they have an automatic script — It is much less time-consuming.

We used to do it manually which would take almost two to three hours in total.

We did it in-house. I'm certified in CyberArk; I've also installed it for clients as well.

The licensing plan is either six months or one year — it's not on a monthly basis.

Every company will have a different license fee, but ultimately, it comes down to how many users you want to manage and how many companies you want to support. If you want three CPMs, then you'll need licensing for three. It's per-company, license-based.

I am currently evaluating other solutions. A few of them do not support PTA. Some of them don't have DevOps properly managed. Others don't give you the DNE facility, which is free of charge with CyberArk.

I would definitely recommend CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

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.

Our primary use case is to control the technical accounts used in our DevOps environnment. The primary goal was to automate to the maximum all privileged accounts used by applications. It was a big issue because al dev guys were always using the same account/password couple. CyberArk is doing this for them transparently. Through time the scope was extended to all interactive users with the target to avoid them knowing the password. The automated password change was implemented to 99% of all accounts inside the company.

Before the CyberArk implementation passwords were never changed and known by everyone. We were also not able to track who is supposed to have access to what and who did what. With the successful CyberArk implementation, we are able now to:

- Guarantee the password is known by no one or for a maximum of eight hours.

- Full visibility about who is doing what.

- Full control about who is supposed to access what.

The risk of lost password and forbidden access to resources has been drastically reduced which increased the security level for the entire company,

In order to reduce the attack surface, the automated password change was pushed to the maximum. This way we know that no password is known or not for more than eight hours. It simplified the life of the operational teams because they do not need to take care of the secrets and keep their attention to maintain the infrastructure.

What also helped is the ability to constantly track who accessed which object. We took the opportunity to change our process in order to comply it. Now the activities can be done faster with better user experience.

CyberArk lacks the following functions for a better IAM like solution:

- Provision accounts for systems and directories.

- Create access to the systems.

- Monitor if any new account has been created into the system.

- Better GUI for the end-user and also for administrators. The learning curve is quite long and requires lots of training for good usage.

- More automated process for account provisioning into CyberArk. For example when a new DB is created.

- Better documentation with more examples for the configuration files and API/REST integration.

I have been using CyberArk PAS for eight years.

The stability is very good. We never had any crash in eight years.

Scalability is good because of the big variety of modules. Except for the redundancy which is quite limited with the not live replication. Also, the speed is quite slow for application accounts.

Very good always reactive. The commercial part was more difficult.

The initial setup is complex because it requires a clear company structure which was not the case. Technically also CyberArk is hard to address at the start because of its technical complexity and abilities.

In house. Very good.

Not calculated. Users and administrators more happy than before which is the best RIO.

CyberArk is quite expensive and they should have a better pricing model.

BeyondTrust, Hitachi ID, CA.

Hard to implement and to get acceptance from the users and management. But when installed the solution is rock solid.

An example of one of the ways CyberArk has benefited our company is one of the simplest. And this one is something that a lot of companies struggle with: domain administrators and server administrators. These are among the top accounts that most companies need to protect. As part of our deployment, we decided to go with these first when we deployed PSM.

What we found out was that there's always that friction with operational teams where they don't want to do this kind of work because it is another thing they have to do. But once the product was deployed and we were able to give them all the tools that they have today, and they did not have to go through attestations and audits anymore and, when team members were coming in and leaving, all they had to do was put in a ServiceNow request to complete all the work, it was just something so different for them that all that friction just went away. It was one of those simplest things, but one of the biggest things that you can do in your company to protect it.

I don't know if CyberArk really helps with meeting our availability requirements, but it definitely helps a lot with managing the accounts and managing the credentials. Availability? It helps to an extent. If there is an event of some sort, yes, you can always go back and look at the logs and you can figure out through recordings what happened. But it's more about manageability than availability.

In addition, when we started with RPA, there was a requirement that every credential and the bots themselves be protected through the PAM system. From the get-go, we've had CyberArk in the middle. We use standard products for RPA and all credentials are managed through CyberArk. All bots are protected via CyberArk, through PSM, and also through CCP calls. We've got a pretty robust RPA implementation with our PAM platform. Users, bots, the credentials — everything is managed via our PAM solution. From a cost perspective, this was something that was a requirement, so cost was never really an issue here.

The solution's ability to secure robots’ privileged access is pretty good. We've been able to secure our bots. In fact, we take care of our bots right from a development environment, using our development instances. So when our developers are building the scripts around those bots, they're already aware of what's going to happen when things finally go into production. Obviously, the level of security doesn't need to be the same, but we do it through the complete lifecycle.

PSM has been one of the most valuable features. We started on this journey a while back. Initially, when we did not have PSM, we started with AIM and that was our first use case. But an audit came along and we had to go towards something a little bit better and we had to migrate more applications. PSM came along and did exactly what we needed it to do. To take care of all the deficiencies that we had, PSM was the right thing to do.

We work with CyberArk's customer success team and we work with its engineering team back in Israel. We've been doing things on CyberArk which a lot of its customers, we know, have not been doing.

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, and 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. Because this is what the future is. You're not going to have a lot of on-prem applications. Most stuff is going to the cloud.

Not every product is 100 percent stable. CyberArk does have some issues once in a while. But the core product, the vault system, has been extremely stable. We haven't had a single problem since we got this thing deployed, and it's been more than six years now. We've not had a single problem with the vault. 

Related to the software, there are other things that can cause problems. You could have clusters going down or you could have issues with hardware, but the product itself has been very stable. 

There are the usual quirks you have sometimes with PSM, but it's been a very stable product for what we need it to be.

In terms of the product's ability to manage all our access requirements at scale, about 80 percent of it can be managed. There is no product in the market which can say, "We can do 100 percent, we can do everything." Or, they say that they can, but when it comes to it, it doesn't really happen. But with CyberArk, we've had the benefit of it being a little scalable, plus very easy to configure for the different use cases we have. So we can cover around 80 percent. But then we have to put some compensating controls around the other 20 percent.

It has scaled for our use cases. We built it according to the very large specification and it has scaled. It has done exactly what we need it to do. We've not yet had a performance issue to date.

We've had good relationships with their technical department. My team usually does more engineering. We work with CyberArk's customer success team more often than the regular technical support. My operations team usually deals more with tech support.

When it has really come down to major issues, if we've ever had a Sev 1, they've been on point. They have picked up the phone, they've called us and they've helped us.

We did not use a different product. We had an in-built vaulting system for managing our own credentials. We've been a CyberArk customer for a while. We had the document vault. Privileged Access had just come out and CyberArk was one of the easiest choices we could make at that time. That's how we decided to go with it.

The initial setup was not straightforward. The very first setup that we did was specifically for AIM, which was obviously simpler. We had an in-built vault which we replaced with the AIM setup. 

Our PSM setup was very complex. We had about 450 applications that we had to onboard over a period of one year, and we had to remove close to 16,000 accounts. It was a very complicated setup. We built close to 35 different connection components to get this product in.

The total cost of ownership, over credentials, is definitely something that goes down if you have a vaulting system. But if you have deployed it correctly, that's the only time you can get that. We've definitely seen some improvements. There are additional costs associated with getting every application onboarded, but in the long run, it keeps the company secure and I don't think you can put a price on that.

We use the solution with AWS. In fact, we set up a custom setup for AWS. We worked with the CyberArk engineering team to get it working, to come up with a custom solution to integrate our AWS EC2 instances. There were some limitations, as I mentioned earlier, with how the product integrates with AWS, so we had to make some major changes to how the integration works. As far as monitoring is concerned, it's standard CyberArk monitoring. We don't see anything specific to AWS, as far as the monitoring is concerned. This is the one place where CyberArk can improve.

Privileged access management is one part of IM. Anything that goes through has to get approved through the IM team, and our product of choice for privilege access is CyberArk. When we decided to go to the cloud, this was the natural choice because this was the product that the enterprise uses. We've had challenges. We've had to customize the product to meet our requirements. It might not be the same for every customer because our requirements are a little unique. But it eventually worked out. We've been able to meet most of our use cases.

CyberArk is an eight out of 10. It can do a lot. But there is definitely scope for improvement.

I come from the IM world, but I was more into access management. CyberArk was just one of those products which was thrust on me. Now I'm head of privileged access management, so CyberArk has been pretty good for me, going from the access management space to privileged access management. It's definitely had an impact on my career.

We're a small IT shop of a few hundred people and the company has only a couple of thousand employees. We had some SharePoint workflows that people had used to get access via submitting a ticket. We had updated those processes by using some DevOps, some JAMS jobs that run in Azure, and they were breaking frequently. We have gotten people to understand now that they can just go to CyberArk. They don't have to submit a ticket, they don't have to go through a workflow, they don't have to put in the right server name or wait for an approval. It's just there. People really like that.

The solution standardizes security and reduces risk-access across the company. It's what the solution does. It's just a requirement. Standardizing access is taking away the "onesie-twosies." With the DNA scan, you're running a full report of everything on all your servers that you're targeting, or all the servers period, and finding those onesie-twosies accounts and getting rid of them. Standardizing and making local accounts on the servers, accounts that have least privilege and that don't have access to anything else, and giving people only that access when they log onto a box; that's pretty cool standardization.

In terms of being able to have a quick win using the solution, we were given a ridiculous deadline to meet an external customer requirement to have privileged access management in place within a couple of months. That was to include signing the purchase order, getting it installed, and having it up day one to take in what we thought were 17 servers. Actually, we found out it was 53 and, two weeks after we had it running, we found out there were upwards of 60 to 70 servers. Getting all those servers in, the accounts in place, by the deadline — even just installing it — was all an immediate win. People said it couldn't be done.

Right off the bat, the most valuable feature is the DNA scan. It gives us the ability to scan our environment and find the accounts that we're going to need to take under control.

We're quite new with CyberArk. We've just installed it this past summer and we've taken off with the Microsoft tier model. Tier 0 is our domain admin accounts and our local admin accounts on some applications are specific to SOX requirements. That's been amazing. It's basic-use PAM, but it's been really fast and easy because of the DNA scan. We knew what was there and we were able to go find who owned those accounts. Step one, step two, step three are really easy.

We're pretty excited about Alero, the third-party access management. As a small company we lean on vendors quite a bit and we do that in multiple areas. That's going to be a big one for us. It's just gone from beta to production. It's one of those things that's on our roadmap, but being so new to the toolset, we're just growing into the tool. We're not quite there yet.

The product has been around forever. In a way, it's a bit old-school. I came from a Windows Server environment, so I get how it's built. It's INI files, it's apps that run on Windows Servers. I'm sure there are other ways that it runs, such as in the cloud as well. There are other directions. But the base of the product is old-school. It just works. So the stability is there. My new engineers can do the install, they can understand how it works. It's quite stable.

In terms of scaling, we're not there yet. We have a number of offices, we're a small company but we're spread globally and we're installing servers in Brazil. We also have servers in London, so we can scale geographically quite easily because it's applications running on servers. There's also a DR capability, having those vaults where needed, so we can scale that way.

There are a lot of new things coming out about endpoints, and third-party management is going to be big. We can scale geographically and we can scale outside of our borders and that's going to be cool.

We had no PAM program when I came to this company.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's well-documented. We sought to have external advisors and third-party consultants help, in addition to CyberArk's help, because we had such tight deadlines. We were installing multiple environments with a turnaround in weeks and had to complete the training at the same time. Junior engineers were coming in and they could walk through it. We found out that it's almost self-doable. But that's probably not advised in any solution. The help was appreciated but it's straight-away easy.

In a previous life, I worked with TPAM, Quest products, and Safeguard. We evaluated five different toolsets when it came to my new role here — all the major players. The last two were Quest and CyberArk and I had a strong relationship with both groups. A lot of it came down to dollars and cents, but CyberArk also had that marketplace that told us that we could do certain things out-of-the-box. That was very important to us, enabling us to get stakeholders' buy-in: strategic alliances within our customers or the companies that we own. We got them bought-in to the idea that they were going to be using this tool. It came down to the marketplace.

I'd never ever rate anything a 10. I'd probably never rate anything a one. I'd rate CyberArk as 7.5 out of 10. We actually did surveys of all the people that saw all the demos of all the new solutions we looked at. CyberArk was a seven or eight consistently, from all the people who watched it. The benefit of it is it's stable, it's old-school, it just works. The downside is that it's a big program. To scale excessively, locally, on an on-prem application, takes a lot of servers. Those are the highs and lows. It could be amazing if it all ran in the cloud, but that wouldn't be possible.

I started as a PAM engineer eight years ago. Learning PAM and understanding how it protects people and being the liaison who needs to take passwords away from engineers is really tough. But it put me in a good spot. I grew from a PAM engineer to an identity engineer to identity team lead to identity manager. Within the last year-and-a-half, I came into this company because of a PAM role. They hired me as an identity manager because I knew PAM and because I had a relationship; I was working on bringing CyberArk in as part of my previous role and they wanted me to come in and do that same evaluation here. So knowing CyberArk got me my job and, within three months, they said, "We don't need just one team like this doing these assessments. We need multiple teams. So you're an associate director." I said, "Thanks, I don't want to do that. I just want to play with PAM."

To securely manage privileged accounts within the enterprise and automate password compliance where possible. Bringing multiple account types all into a single central repository with an intuitive user interface has greatly improved our security standing. Instead of managing each account in its disparate location like Database, Active Directory, LDAP, and Mainframe, we can now do it from a single solution. This has enabled great strides in standardizations across account types for password and access management.

CyberArk has enabled my organization to monitor and manage privileged accounts in a secure manner while also giving the ability to adhere to password compliance automatically. CyberArk has helped us to remove hard-coded credentials in applications and scripts. Traditional password policies often fall short of providing adequate protection, but CyberArk's PAM has allowed my organization to set robust password policies that require a combination of uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and special characters.

AIM has been a great help in automating password retrieval which removes the need for hard-coded credentials. Hard-coded credentials are a risk to organizations as they are easy for attackers to target. Therefore less hard-coded credentials increase the security stance of the enterprise. We have greatly utilized the out-of-the-box usage automation like Windows Scheduled tasks and password config files. The reconcile feature is another must-have to give users the ability to not only change their password but to unlock it as well where needed. 

CyberArk's Privileged Access Management (PAM) stands out as an industry leader, and it is often considered at the top of its class. This comprehensive solution has consistently delivered robust features and innovative security measures that make it an essential component of any organization's cybersecurity strategy. While no system is without room for advancement, CyberArk has continuously demonstrated its commitment to innovation and improvement, and many of the potential areas of improvement are already being actively addressed.

I have been using this solution for 13 years.

This solution is very stable with the ability of satellite vaults and HA.

CyberArk is incredibly scalable. Make sure to check out the unlimited option.

Excellent service and quick responses with engineers who understand the product.

Positive

We started out with CyberArk. When we started to look into using a PAM solution they were the leader in the space (and still are).

For the time saved and security added, the benefit far outweighs the cost.

Check out the unlimited model as it can save money and make for a more scalable solution depending on the size and needs of your organization.

My company evaluated other options, but I was not with the company when this occurred.

Contact the professional help for a demo, and you will not be disappointed. Even if you do not choose CyberArk, they can help identify current security gaps.

We currently employ CyberArk Privileged Access Management, which involves extremely complex processes for ensuring the secure management, verification, and guarantee of credentials. Implementing the professional installation tool represents another challenging aspect of this task.

The most valuable feature of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is privileged threat analytics.

The support could improve for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager.

I have been using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for approximately three years.

The solution has high availability.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is highly scalable. When compared to other solutions it scales well.

I plan to use the solution more in the future.

The issue of technical support is crucial, as there are not many specialized partners available in Brazil to provide this service. While English language support is of good quality, there is a significant shortage of partners capable of meeting the demand locally.

The initial setup of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is easy.

We have received a high ROI using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager.

The price of the solution is reasonable.

I rate the price CyberArk Privileged Access Manager a seven out of ten.

Individuals who wish to utilize CyberArk should be cautious when selecting a partner to implement the solution, as proper architecture design is essential to ensure a streamlined and effective implementation.

I rate CyberArk Privileged Access Manager a nine out of ten.

The most valuable feature of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the vault. I am satisfied with the interface and the documentation.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager could improve the integration with other third-party secret managers, and vault solutions.

I have been working with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for approximately three years. Our clients are typically financial institutions.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is stable.

The scalability of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is good.

Most of our clients are enterprise-sized companies.

I am satisfied with the vendor's support.

Positive

I have used Balabit and One Identity prior to using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. I found that CyberArk has more integration out of the box with other solutions and it solves a lot of problems for customers if they have different solutions.

The initial setup CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is easy.

The price of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager could be less expensive.

My advice to others is this solution can solve a lot of problems.

I rate CyberArk Privileged Access Manager a nine out of ten.