CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Reviews

We mainly use it to protect servers from inappropriate access and ransomware.

We started with on-prem solutions years ago. Our most recent implementations were done in data centers and the cloud. However, we are not in the cloud for CyberArk.

It is a really valuable tool. From the very beginning of my career in cybersecurity, I found that CyberArk is one of the best solutions that I could recommend to our customers. While it is usually seen as an access and identity management solution, it is a cybersecurity and cyber defense tool from my colleague's and my point of view.

It is a single tool that isolates possible kinds of malware. You get lateral movement blocking and auditing information, e.g., you know who is doing what. You are getting protections from the service as well as a useful environment. All your admins can easily go in and out of your company while accessing your servers in a secure way, even if they are working abroad.

One of the best points is that it gives you full control for all the use cases in your infrastructure, in terms of servers, applications, social networks, batch processes, etc. 

It gives you the ability to know what is happening, who is executing everything, and recover that information over time. Everything is recorded there. This is useful, not only for auditing proposes, but for admins and users. This also helps with troubleshooting. For instance, an application or system starts failing at 4:30 in the morning on a Sunday. Usually, the first questions that you ask yourself is, "What changed at 4:30? What has happened? Who was touching that server?" WIth CyberArk, you have the ability to search for that information and find it in minutes. It is really useful for troubleshooting.

The PPA from CyberArk provides a lot of information about access and allows for possible detection of fraudulent use or different tries of accessing, even for family Internet users. Thus, it gives you another source of information regarding risk.

We are using Secrets Manager with some of our customers. We are using it mainly for containers and DevOps. This secure access is really important, and becoming more important every day. We are constantly moving customers to the cloud. Every day, containers are more important for our customers as they extend into microservices, etc. 

The possibility to integrate with the DevOps cycle is vital right now. Sometimes, containers are deployed while some clients have them very protected. They have a lot of things with Panorama, Microsoft, etc. That is a risk because you are deploying things quickly, along with errors and other things that you are developing. So, having to use hard-coded passwords here would be a big mistake. 

Secrets Manager accelerates a lot of the possibilities and simplifies the process, since development teams just need to use credentials. When they arrive on a project, there are new people or resources in their development teams. Thanks to CyberArk, they just need to manage their identities to have access to everything. They don't need to receive credentials nor search for them. They have everything the day that they start working.

We find it easy to use CyberArk PAM to implement least privilege entitlements. We usually do some interviews at the very beginning with different teams to understand their real needs. We define saves and different AV groups for the kind of users that we are going to prepare. Then, the process to assign permissions to different groups is really easy and straightforward. If you want to change or reduce access, that can be easily changed at any moment.

I have been using it for more than 10 years.

In the last year, it has been a very stable platform.

Scalability is fantastic. It has been really easy to scale. In fact, most of our customers who start, or have doubts about how to start, we propose to them, "Well, if you are not sure or don't have the budget right now, you can start with a small deployment, then we will grow." It easily grows and you can add components. 

Other customers have started with a small CPD deployment, then replicated. We put high availability on another CPD. It is really good for public clouds.

We have some customer environments that are over 10,000 servers as well as some environments with more than 50,000 managed identities.

I would rate their technical support as eight out of 10. They are usually really good and quick about answering any questions that you raise. However, they are sometimes not flexible with things. For instance, from one day to another, there might be something that had been done years ago by CyberArk, then they say, "We do not support that." You then have to initiate a complaint and start working with them. Things might become complicated and months pass while you are working with them. Usually, they are good and fast, but sometimes they seem to be blocked with problems, e.g., you will suddenly be working with another team instead of the team that you were working with the day before.

Positive

I have been working with CyberArk and with the CyberArk teams for years. They have been able to adapt the solutions that they have developed or bought. They have grown a lot with the acquisition of different companies. They have been able to adapt them, make them valuable, and helpful.

The initial setup is straightforward because we have a lot of experience with it. While there are a lot of components, I don't find it difficult.

A deployment can typically be done in less than a week, but it does depend on the environment.

We have developed our own methodology for the implementation and deployment of CyberArk. We put the final users at the center of their strategy. One of the things that we have found that fails when deploying a PAM solution is that everyone focuses on the tool. CyberArk works and we know the tool is there, so we just focus on how the different groups are working with their servers, applications, etc. We focus on adapting the deployment in a way that does not disrupt their jobs. We try to be non-disruptive and not change the way users work.

We adapt the solution to already existing workflow processes, tools, accesses, etc. This is one of the best parts of CyberArk. It provides a lot of flexibility to adapt.

The main problem for the tool is its licensing. I work for a really big company. When you try to develop this as a service, usually you work with leverage teams who are formed with dozens of members. You might dedicate one FTE, or less, for something, e.g., an antivirus administrator. You might have half an FTE's effort dedicated to administering the antivirus, but then you have a team of about 30 users who might access that ticket. The problem is that CyberArk eliminated the possibility of concurrent users years ago. This is a big problem for companies who work with leverage teams.

You need to pay for everyone. 40 licenses are used by 20 or 30 people. This is a big problem because licenses are not precisely cheap.

It provides the broadest point of view for privileged access management solutions in the market. We have tested several other proposals and tools for our customers and ourselves. There is a huge difference with using CyberArk.

We evaluated CA PAM and another solution. The main difference is that they cover just a part of the solution. They promise the solution will be very simple to deploy because they only have a simple appliance. However, they are actually really difficult to deploy for an entire project as well as give you value. We have experienced a lot of support and integration problems. You need to do a lot of things by yourself. Whereas, in CyberArk, you have plenty of plugins and developed material in the marketplace. 

This is the big difference at the moment. When you are deploying, it seems like a very simple project, and the other solutions will tell you, "Well, it's just an appliance," and then it becomes a nightmare. Whereas, CyberArk does what it does. You need to deploy several servers, but it works.

From time to time, people in the market are like, "Wow, it was born as a cloud-native solution." Sometimes, this is real and means something, but usually it is mostly a marketing thing. Why would we ignore all a solution's previous experience just for something born in the cloud? Most of the IT solutions that we use in the cybersecurity market are not born in the cloud. For instance, if you go with Securonix or Sentinel, there is a huge difference in the way they were conceived and the way they were born. Just because something is cloud-native or new doesn't mean that it is good. I wouldn't go for something that is cloud-native, just because it is.

I would rate CyberArk as nine out of 10. I won't give the 10 because I have my problems with the licensing. However, the solution is completely recommendable and a must-have in every environment.

I use CyberArk as a password vault and session recordings and to connect the server sites. I use some critical systems if I can access them, including workflows and mechanisms. 

It's really good. 

The digital vault is great. It protects our passwords and manages those passwords and changing periods.

There is some third-party access to our system's recording process. It's very, very important for us and we're glad they allow it.

It is a robust product. It's very stable and reliable.

The solution can scale well. 

The interface could be updated a bit. Right now, it's not very good. 

It is very complex and difficult to set up the solution. 

Maybe some customers have a lot of systems. For example, we have 1000 Windows systems and 500 Linux systems. I need a remote desktop management solution for the CyberArk. I'd like to be able to change desktops with one click. We'd like the next release to have remote desktop management tools. 

I've been using the solution for the last five years. 

The solution is very stable.

We no have had no performance issues; it's a really robust product. If I need more performance, I use another server, install another server, and improve our performance.

It is very easily scalable. 

We have 50 admins on this solution. 

We are using the solution to 70% capacity. We do plan to increase usage. 

We did use Delinea, formally Thycotic. That solution is really good, however, not fully secure. CyberArk is a more secure product - much better than Thycotic. Thycotic may be better in terms of its admin-friendly interface and integration, however, CyberArk offers more than vendor integration. It has massive integration capabilities.

The implementation and integration process is very, very complex. It is a robust product, however. I don't have to do a lot of setups, luckily. However, when you first set it up, it's very difficult as you don't really know what you're doing. 

The first 27% of the implementation took us maybe three months, however, for more than 95% of installation, it took us over one year. We had all the features up and running, however. 

We started with connection and session recording features, however, items such as password changing and other integrations, for example, firewall connection and switch interface connection were rolled out over the year.

You only need one person to maintain the solution. 

We had a third party help us with the implementation process. 

It's a yearly license that we pay. It is more expensive than other options. There are competitive products that are cheaper. 

I can't speak to the exact price. On a scale of one to five, with one being the most expensive, I would rate it a one. The license covers five servers. If you need more servers, you pay more. The same is true with disaster sites. If you need a disaster site, you are fine. It is included. If you need more, you need to pay for it. 

We did look at multi-factor authentification options and zero-trust network access. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. It's likely the latest version.

This is a fully secure product and integrates with a lot of different systems. I'd recommend the product to others. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

There are many possible use cases, but in general, CyberArk permits users to target machines and rotate their passwords, and to record decisions. It is used to create security through PTA and to forward Vault logs and investigate events. It also enables users to access passwords in dev code without actually knowing the passwords. There are a lot of advantages to CyberArk.

As a consultant, I have seen a lot of CyberArk configurations. Sometimes we use the CyberArk Cluster Vaults with one DR. I also worked for a company that used only one vault, without a cluster, but they switched data centers when there was an incident.

I used to be a Windows and Linux administrator before I used CyberArk. The difference is that now it is simple for me to connect to my target machines. I can add them to my favorites, making access to the servers simple. 

CyberArk enables confidentiality. The passwords are stored in a fully secured Vault. If you want, you can access target machines without using PVWA. If you act as a remote desktop manager, you can register your connections and connect your target machines through the virtual IP and easily connect to your machines. Your connections and commands would all be registered to the Vault.

All the features of CyberArk are useful for me, but the biggest one is that CyberArk has logs for all the features. That is important when there is a problem. You know where to look and you have the information. In cyber security, the most important aspect is information.

Another valuable feature is that if you don't have access to a machine, you can see the machine in CyberArk. It's the management capabilities that CyberArk enables for a company that are very useful.

Other useful features are optional, such as recording decisions or rotating passwords.

The PTA could be improved. Currently, companies often have multiple domains and sometimes it's difficult to implement CyberArk in this kind of infrastructure. For example, you can add CPM (Central Policy Manager) and PSM (Privileged Session Manager and PVWA (Password Vault Web Access) for access, but if you want to add PTA (Privileged Threat Analysis) to scan Vault logs, it is difficult because this component may be adding multiple domain environments. 

CyberArk, as a solution, can easily adapt to a lot of environments, and you can add a lot of components to different zones, and that will work with the Vault. But not all the components, such as the PTA, can do so.

Also, it would be helpful if CyberArk added some features for monitoring machines when we access them. For example, they need to improve the PVWA. In general, when we don't use the PVWA, we don't have a lot of problems. For me, the PVWA is not perfect. I would like to see more features in the PVWA to administer our machines and to improve the transfer of data.

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

I have implemented and maintained CyberArk solutions for clients, including creating administration functionality, such as platforms and support for users, so that everybody has 24/7 access to the account. 

I have also been involved in enhancing the solution by installing useful components and testing them. I would help analyze if a component could be of interest to the client and then implement it in production.

In general, I would help maintain the solutions and make sure that everybody can access the accounts, and that password rotation works.

I would rate WALLIX support at six out of ten, while CyberArk's support is a seven. The reason it's a seven is that we always have to send them the logs. Of course, we do get some response and they work on things, but sometimes we lose time on little tickets.

Neutral

If you have some experience, it is not complex to implement CyberArk. For me, the preparation is more difficult than the installation. Because CyberArk uses binaries, if you add good information, it will work. But if you miss something at the preparation stage, like the opening of the flows that you need, of course, it will be difficult. I know how the solution works, so it's not difficult.

First, you have to install the Vaults, and after installing them you can add PVWA to access the information. After that, you can install the PSM and then the CPM for the rotation, and that's it.

The time it takes to implement depends on the environment. Sometimes we work with complex environments and we have to adapt and collect all the information that we will need. We need to look out how the machines should be set up for the installation. It really depends on the size of CyberArk you want to install, including how many computers will be onboarded to CyberArk. There are technical and functional variables.

CyberArk is one of the best PAM solutions and one of the most expensive, but it works better than the others, so the pricing is fair.

I used to work on WALLIX Bastion, but CyberArk works better than WALLIX. WALLIX is a PAM solution, a French version, but when I was at another job I was a consultant on both WALLIX and CyberArk at the same time. That's when I saw that CyberArk is better.

It is simpler to upgrade the CyberArk environment and components than WALLIX. CyberArk has a user interface but WALLIX does not because WALLIX is installed on Linux while CyberArk is installed on Windows, making it user-friendly. Connecting is also simple with CyberArk. When a user connects to the PVWA, there aren't a lot of buttons. When users see the icon, they click "Connect" and connect. It is simple for them.

CyberArk can adapt easily to environments. For example, when we talk about connectors, CyberArk can easily connect to all the target machines these days. CyberArk can onboard network machines, Windows Servers, Linux servers, and Oracle Databases.

Web application passwords can be rotated. With its PSM and Selenium features, it enables the connection of a web application to CyberArk and rotation of passwords, so that it's not system accounts all the time. We can manage the web application accounts as well. CyberArk can also connect to the cloud.

When you work on CyberArk, you have to have more than one skill set. You are not just a PAM consultant because you manage passwords for all kinds of systems. You have to have skills in Windows, Linux, databases, and security because you manage those kinds of accounts. If you don't have those kinds of prerequisites, you can't work with CyberArk.

I started working on CyberArk when it was version 10.x and at this moment it is at 12 and more. The interface has changed and a lot of features have been added over that time. It's a good solution.

The solution is used to provide privileged access management to our datacentre environments, for anyone with admin rights with infrastructure or applications within the datacentres. Authentication to the solution in the PVWA (Password Vault Web Access) with onward connectivity via the PSM for Windows (PSM) as well as the PSM for SSH (PSMP). These provide the session isolation, audit, and session recording capabilities that CyberArk offers. The use of Privileged Threat Analytics (PTA) adds more control functionality to the solution.

The product has allowed us to improve both the management and access to privileged credentials, while also creating a full audit trail of all activities happening within isolated sessions of all tasks and activities taking place within the solution. 

This includes sessions via the solution and sessions to administer the solution itself. From a user perspective, we no longer need to try and create or remember complex passwords or have to be concerned about when they will change as the solution takes care of this and can and does populate these credentials for you so mistyping a complex password is a thing of the past.

Password management is a great feature, as all passwords are changed more frequently (this can be scheduled in line with a specific policy requirement or each time the credentials are returned to the pool for reuse and are always compliant with the password policy however long or complicated the policy states that they need to be. 

Another great feature is the Privileged Threat Analytics (PTA) as this can stop a session based on prescribed risk and bring it to an end or pause it pending approval to proceed.  

The admin interface of the Password Vault Web Access (PVWA) is moving from an old style (the classic interface) to a new style (the v10 interface) and unfortunately, this process is quite slow. That said, it has been moving in the right direction with features becoming available in the v10 interface and some user features are available in both classic and v10 interfaces. I would love to see all the classic interface features moved into the v10 interface or available in both interfaces within the next version. 

I've used the solution for about six years.

The solution has been very stable.

The solution performs well, however, based on the user base may require a sizable footprint.

Support does vary depending on how critical your issue is and if it needs to be elevated to dev support.

Positive

Our previous solution was not a PAM solution and these days you can't afford to not use one.

The setup is not complicated when trained staff are used.

We handled the initial setup in-house.

Set-up costs can be minimized by controlling the number of applications that are made available within the solution. The newer licenses are per user and open up access to a suite of products, the best value, and security can be achieved by using more of the products.

We looked at other products like Delinia and Wallix.

Take advantage of the vendor's training or use a good partner to provide support and administration.

CyberArk's Privileged Access Management solution covers a whole range of features, like privileged web access, private vault, privileged session manager rights for a session in isolation, privileged threat analytics for analytics, and private sessions. We also use CyberArk's Application Access Manager, which includes their credential providers, such as agents and run servers. Then there is a central credential provider, which is API-based credential retrieval, and DAP or Conjur. This is more of a DevOps model for credential provisioning. We also have the Central Policy Manager, which rotates the credentials associated with unprivileged or servers accounts. It's a huge environment. 

Those are all the different functions we use. We initially purchased CyberArk for privileged access manager and session isolation of privileged users. By privileged users, I mean main admins, global admins, and preps like Azure or Office 365. Our initial use case was to manage those users who could drastically impact the environment if their credentials were compromised.

After we purchased the product, we had a third party on it. They suggested we also leverage CyberArk as part of the platform for managing service accounts, i.e. go out and proactively rotate credentials that are running or ordering services. That's another kind of big use case that we started implementing a couple of years. It's long work. It is tough to do, there's a lot of cases where it just doesn't work right, but overall it's been pretty valuable.

From a security perspective, CyberArk PAM gives us a lot of control and visibility into what our privileged users are doing. In terms of securing our cloud-native apps, we're just getting into deploying things to Azure, AWS, etc., and DAP brings a lot of value to that because it is cloud-agnostic credential retrieval. Azure has their key vaults, and AWS has their version if you are a multi-cloud solution. CyberArk's Secrets Manager, or DAP, brings a lot of value because you only have to learn how to integrate your apps with one solution that can be deployed across multiple clouds. 

I will say that CyberArk is struggling with some of the cloud integrations. For instance, Azure has a native identity solution, and Microsoft keeps causing issues with their ability to identify the hosts calling back. Some cloud providers are trying to lock CyberArk and other tools out of their environment and force you to use their native one. With that said, I don't use the other functions. I don't use the containerization Kubernetes integration or anything like that. We're not at that point yet. One of my significant concerns about investing a lot of time in CyberArk Conjur or DAP solution is that Microsoft seems to be trying to push them out of that space, and if they do that, then all of that work is null and void.

In our initial use case, we found CyberArk's privileged session management functionality to be incredibly flexible. It's challenging to write these plug-ins, but if you have somebody with a development background, you can write all sorts of custom connections to support different functional applications. We've written over a hundred custom connectors ourselves that allow us to do all types of privileged session management for various applications. On top of that, the rest of the API-based central credential providers allow us to get away from credentials that may be hard-coded in the script or some application. 

CyberArk's web console isn't in a great state. Over the last three years, if not more, it has been transitioning from what they call the "classic UI" to its modern interface. However, there are a lot of features that you can only use in the classic interface. Hence, each version seems to put more makeup on the modern interface, but all of the complex functionality you need is still in the classic UI. 

I'm not sure they've figured out how to transition, and they're kind of in a weird state. So, while CyberArk has made strides, the web interface is painful, particularly as an administrator, because you have to bounce between these different user interfaces. It is an incredibly complex solution that requires at least a dedicated employee or more to maintain it, support it, and understand it thoroughly. If you don't have that, it's just not the right solution for you because it is very complicated. 

Many of the infrastructure folks who use the product dislike it because it complicates their workflow. They get a little less control, and they have to go through a specific solution. It proactively logs in for them, which obfuscates some of the issues that they may be troubleshooting. And I think some of the consumers aren't big fans of the product. Also, I feel that in the last year or so, CyberArk has been pushing very hard for customers to go to their cloud solution. It doesn't have the same flexibility as the on-premise version, which is problematic because that's where I see a lot of value in the solution.

I've been using CyberArk PAM for about four years now.

CyberArk support isn't the worst, but it's certainly not the best. I'd give it a six out of 10. They were responsive. After you submit a ticket, you get the typical response. You gather all the logs and send them, and then they do some analysis. They typically send you back to get more specific logs, so it's a standard support experience. I would not say it's great, but it is not terrible either.

Overall, as a partner in our digital transformation, CyberArk has been great. The technology adds a lot of value, but they're also very much engaged and concerned. The customer success manager very much wants to make sure we're getting value out of the tool. I guess my only concern there is that they are pushing very heavily for customers to switch to their new cloud solutions that may or may not fit our needs or expectations. I am worried that they're going to push even harder. For example, CyberArk might start offering features only available in the cloud solution that would make our future somewhat tenuous depending on what's going on. So my only hangup is that they're pushing cloud solutions that I don't think are very mature yet.

Neutral

The environment's architecture is very complex, depending on your use cases, and I'm talking about CyberArk as a whole. Their past solution — their AM solution — and all of the other solutions bundled together are straightforward, and it all needs to work together. Depending on your use case and the connected components you need to have or build, you must learn a lot. So, it's not as simple a thing to deploy — at least on-premise. It isn't straightforward. Our environment comprises 20 to 30 servers that we had to spin up and connect. Disaster recovery has to be thoroughly vetted, discussed, and documented because as you onboard and manage those privileged accounts, you need a way to get to them if something goes wrong.

It took about a month to get the product running and several months to onboard users. And when we start talking about Application Access Manager, that's ongoing, and I think that'll probably be ongoing for a very long time. We were targeting our specific use cases, so we started with interactive users. The whole idea was to restrict, manage, and monitor those interactive users. Our rollout proceeded from the most privileged users to the less privileged users. Then we started targeting service accounts and that kind of stuff. So it was a phased approach from highest risk to lowest risk to lower risk.

CyberArk PAM requires a lot of maintenance. Right now, we have about one and a half people, but I would say we need to add several more people to do a better job and add a lot of functionality. It requires a lot of maintenance and monitoring. They've relied on many different Microsoft features to secure the privileged session manager. It requires a lot of tuning, monitoring, and managing those solutions. They use AppLocker to restrict and isolate these running sessions, and AppLocker breaks all the time, so you have to go in and troubleshoot why it's broken and tweak it. That could mean adding a new rule or updating an application. It is a lot of maintenance, depending on your use case. But then again, we have gone very hard into privileged session management and developed over a hundred custom connectors. Another customer might deploy RDP and call it a day, drastically reducing maintenance.

If you ask me the ROI, I'm not sure I could give you an exact number. Security tools are pretty tricky when it comes to that. But if you're adopting a risk-based approach, this substantially reduces risk. It brought a lot of visibility and allowed us to monitor all of our privileged users, so it is valuable from the perspective of KPI, modern solutions, and risk reduction. If we were to score this on an internal risk review, our previous risk would rank four out of five, and we've lowered this to a low severity risk.

CyberArk had just changed switched their licensing model to perpetual licenses when we purchased, including the whole PAM Suite. Before we bought it, they were licensing each function individually, which got complicated and very expensive. When we decided to buy it, it was much more straightforward and still quite expensive, but it brings a lot of value and risk reduction to the organization. 

In the last year or so, it's my understanding that they have switched from a perpetual licensing model to pushing companies to a subscription-based model. I have not dealt with this yet, so I'm not sure my feedback on licensing would be too valuable because they've moved away from the license type we purchased.

This was our first foray into the PAM space. We did a proof of concept evaluating three different solutions, so CyberArk was the clear winner. I don't want to speak ill of any other solutions, but I will say that CyberArk's architecture was much more secure. Other competing solutions may leverage an agent that is installed on your local machine and runs your privileged applications locally, leaving a lot to be desired from a security perspective. 

CyberArk uses remote desktop gateways similar to Microsoft's RDS functionality, and it abstracts that privileged application from your workstation. So even if you're compromised, a malicious actor on your laptop or workstation would not be able to get to that privileged application. This was very valuable to us. Other solutions did not have that functionality.

As it stands today, I would rate CyberArk PAM nine out of 10. However, I'm concerned about the future of the platform. While I've had nothing but great experiences so far, I have concerns about how they've been pushing that cloud solution in the last year and a half. I feel like they're going to pressure us to move to the cloud even though they're not mature enough in the cloud. 

Rather than create a cloud-native version, they've migrated their on-premise solution to the cloud, but they don't allow cloud customers to access the backend, which I recommend all the time as an on-premise user. Instead, you have to submit a support ticket and have their support do things on your behalf, which delays your ability to work with the tool. Furthermore, they may not be willing to make the modifications you want because it would affect their ability to impact the solution consistently. CyberArk designed the on-premise version to be incredibly flexible, and I have never found a use case where I can't do the work I want to do. Their cloud model discards a lot of that flexibility, which is where I see a lot of value, so I have concerns about the future of the tool.

Also, I'd like to point out that service account management is incredibly hard, particularly in a company that's been around for a while. Any company looking to adopt service account management needs to know that it's not as easy as vendors make it sound. Many things don't work right out of the box, so the most important lesson we've learned is to calibrate the expectations of senior management when it comes to service account management because it is a lot harder than anybody thinks. You're likely to break things in the process of trying to manage these accounts. 

I'm a security solutions architect. I design solutions and hand them over to the client once they're implemented. We educate the users on how the solution works or turn it over to our managed services department

CyberArk PAM is an identity management solution used to manage privileged accounts on domains and local servers, including admin accounts in Windows environments and root users in Unix. 

With CyberArk, you can be fully confident that your existing accounts are secure. You will be 100 percent secure against attacks if you have all the right policies in place.

PAM could be more user-friendly and CyberArk could update the documentation to include more real-world examples. You have to learn it yourself through trial and error. In particular, the online documentation should have more information about troubleshooting.

I have used CyberArk PAM for two years. 

CyberArk PAM is stable.

CyberArk PAM is scalable. Managing 80,000 accounts is almost as easy as managing a thousand. 

CyberArk has a solid community. It's easy to get support and feedback from the forums. However, it can be difficult to access official technical support if you don't have a CyberArk certification because they have a process to limit unnecessary calls. You get excellent support once you're certified. 

Deploying CyberARK is complicated, but it is relatively easy for me because I have excellent scripts for implementing the prerequisites. It might be challenging for the average end user. It would be ideal to educate them in a demo environment because hard to explain this to a user without them. I would need to build an environment to show them. A simulated lab environment is one thing CyberArk PAM lacks.

We set up the prerequisites and discover the privileged accounts in the environment. CyberArk has a tool that scans the servers and detects accounts. This works best in a Microsoft environment. It's more difficult without Active Directory because you have to rely on the information the customer provides. You can begin the onboarding process once you've identified the accounts. 

It takes a month to set up the prerequisites and two or three days to install CyberArk PAM. Once it is deployed, it takes eight months to a year to tie up some loose ends. You may need to identify some accounts that you missed. The total time depends on the size and complexity of the user's environment. If you've configured everything correctly, it's simple to maintain. 

The ROI for CyberArk PAM is difficult to measure because the benefit is a reduction in risk. If CyberArk can eliminate most of the customer's security risks, then it's worth what they paid. 

CyberArk isn't cheap, but it's the best. You have to pay for quality. 

I rate CyberArk Privileged Access Manager 10 out of 10. CyberArk is the leader in Gartner's quadrant. I tell my customers that they need to be 100 percent secure—99 percent isn't good enough. The top hackers will exploit that 1 percent hole, and you're finished. You need 100 percent, or else you're wasting your money.  

The concern on our end was separating the components, including the password storage component, and having everything completely separated. 

The scalability is very easy.

The most valuable aspect was being to be able to manage it through multiple mediums. We can manage it through its command line interface, web view, and directly logging into the digital environment with permission. You have multiple mediums. You don't have to give direct access to the world every time you want to limit what admins should do and what they should not do.

CyberArk has the biggest number of features available when you compare it to other PAN solutions like BeyondTrust, Thycotic, and Delinea. They tend to have a lot of separate components.

Performance-wise, it is excellent. 

The components of their web view, policy manager, and session manager, most of them are separated. We need something which can unify those components into a single appliance. Sometimes the infrastructure team is hesitant to provide more resources. 

They have a lot of out-of-the-box integrations with a lot of other products. However, I would want them to bring on some kind of similar platform. If they can bring up the SSO on-prem, that would be ideal, as they don't have those things on-premises. They only provide that for the cloud. If they can do that, it would actually help a lot of us and keep us from trying to acquire multiple technologies for solutions.

I've used the solution for six or seven years at this point. 

We are very stringent on the performance metrics and would rate the solution very high. It's stable. 

We found that scalability was much easier in CyberArk. In BeyondTrust, scalability required purchasing extra virtual machines every time we wanted to scale it up. However, in CyberArk, we don't need to purchase extra components. It comes along with the line.

Currently, we have around 78 to 80 admins, and there are around 200 underlying accounts. 

We previously used BeyondTrust.

I haven't compared it to Thycotic yet, however, from what I have read, it looks like CyberArk is better. I've also looked into Delinea.

We are reselling the solution to customers.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's quite a good product.

We use CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for our customers who want to monitor and protect the access from the vendor side or the partner side. These customers want to cover external users who want to gain access.

What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users.

In the beginning, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager didn't have a multifactor authentication feature, so that was an area for improvement, but now it's part of the solution.

Having just one console for two CyberArk products would be good, particularly for the CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and the CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, with the latter being a product for endpoint management that supports the workstations and allows you to manage workstations.

In the next update of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, it would be good to have a local agent where you can manage all users and processes, and have an agent on the servers such as Linux and Windows.

I've been working with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for four years.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is a stable solution.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is easy to scale. You can divide the solution into different parts and connect them, then you can add a new feature, a new appliance, or a new system. The solution works.

In terms of the technical support for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, I sometimes contact the service engineer in this region. I also have access to the support portal which I use in some issues, but it's not so often. I found the technical support team very professional and I would rate support for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager five out of five.

The initial setup for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager was complex because, in the beginning, you must get the information from the customer such as how he wants to install it, how he wants to protect privileged accounts, how password rotation would work, etc., before you can install the solution.

The time it takes to deploy CyberArk Privileged Access Manager depends on several factors such as how many admins a customer has, how many devices, and the types of devices, for example, does the customer have servers such as Windows or Linux, some other network solution, or some applications, etc.? It could take between ten, fifteen, or one hundred days. My company needs to analyze at the beginning to define how long the process will take.

On a scale of one to five, with one being complex and five being very easy, I would rate the initial setup for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager four out of five.

I'm a technician so I don't handle the licensing for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, but I know that the price for the core license is about €140 per year. There's another type of license, the external vendor license, and that's about €600 and you can manage twenty devices. From what I know, the price for one device in a subscription is about €65 per year.

You can buy the CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager too, or you can buy some other application or application license with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, but all other features, such as the Analytics Server is included in the basic CyberArk license. With WALLIX, you need to buy separate licenses for the features.

I've evaluated WALLIX, apart from CyberArk Privileged Access Manager.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is a global solution that applies to all customers, from small scale to enterprise businesses, but the solution has a little bit more servers that you need for the installation. WALLIX, on the other hand, is just one appliance that focuses on small-scale customers. Its deployment is much easier because you just install one appliance with all the features inside. Deployment is easier with WALLIX versus CyberArk Privileged Access Manager which has a complex deployment. In the end, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager has more features that you can define or set up, while WALLIX has some limitations.

I'm working for a company that sells privileged access management solutions, including CyberArk Privileged Access Manager.

The version of the solution which I'm dealing with is an old version. Most of the deployment is on-premises, but my company will start cloud deployment for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager as well.

My company resells, implements, and also provides support for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for the customers.

The solution requires upgrading regularly, and if there's a new system or application, you need to set it up for privileged access management on CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, so maintenance is important. Currently, in my company, five people work with the solution where there are about two hundred devices with fifty administrators. In the beginning, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager was for large-sized businesses. Nowadays, it's also used by medium-sized businesses.

I would recommend CyberArk Privileged Access Manager to others looking into implementing it because it's very important to protect privileged accounts in the company and do password rotation, so the hackers won't have a chance to detect and find the real passwords in the system. You can also use CyberArk Privileged Access Manager to protect external users and the admins from the direct connection to the server and after that, you can see what the users and admins do because the system makes video recordings and session logs. It's important to see what the admins do from time to time.

For me, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the best product, and even Gartner says the same, so I would rate it a ten out of ten.

My company is a partner and reseller of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager.