CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Reviews

Our main use cases are to monitor all privileged accesses. It can be HTTPS, LDAP, SSH, or SQL management, so anywhere we have privileged access, we want to monitor it and place it under CyberArk.

Its monitoring capabilities are good. Whenever the end users start their session, it quickly allows you to monitor. However, if there are no firewall rules, it creates a video, but it does not take all the audit logs. For audit logs, you need firewall rules. It is very well described in their documentation. At the start, they communicate this to clients. The documentation is well-defined.

The features that are most effective, like every PAM solution, include monitoring and password rotations. 

The best thing about this solution, especially on-premises, is that we can interact with it directly. If we need to develop something, we are allowed or can do it by ourselves, which is most effective for us as administrators. It is not a black box. We have the ability to customize, especially the connection components.

There are some options in the web portal where they can improve the user experience. For example, in remote, there is a parameter called 'access to remote machine.' When we put host names in that field, we are not able to search it. It would be useful if a search feature was there to check if a machine is already onboarded. When we onboard a few machines in the same domain using just one account, we put the domain name in the address field and host machine names in the remote access parameter. However, we are not able to search within that field, which makes it difficult for us as admins to know if a machine has already been onboarded.

Other than that, I do not have any areas for improvement. Whenever we find any bugs or have a need for a feature, we open a ticket with them. They usually work on that if the same request has also come from other people. They are already good at doing that.

I have been working with CyberArk for almost six to seven years.

The solution is very stable. If you install the solution with CyberArk's guidelines, it remains stable. I also offer 24/7 services, and in three years, I have received two or three calls from clients indicating the solution was not working. It means the solution is very stable.

It is scalable. If a client has 100 users and wants to add 100 more users, it is possible. They can make it bigger and smaller, depending on their needs.

Our clients are medium enterprises.

Their technical support is good. They provide solutions and also the documentation if you ask. If you cannot find something, they point you to the right documentation. With support, I have never found any problems.

There is a lot of complexity if we are installing the solution on-premises. On the cloud, there is no such complexity, but on-premises, it is complex because there are different components like Vault, PVWA, PSM, and CPM. There are many components, and we need to follow a sequence to install these products. One needs a good knowledge of these components to install because we cannot just follow the documentation and install it. The documentation is vast. First, we need to read all of it. For first-time users, it is a bit difficult, but with experience, it is not a big deal. In terms of ease of use, I would rate it a six out of ten for on-premises and a nine out of ten for the cloud.

The deployment model depends on the clients. Our clients from banks usually use it on-premises. Clients in other fields do not want to install the machines on-premises because that is resource-consuming, so they go for the cloud deployment.

With the cloud deployment model, the clients need to deploy fewer components in their infrastructure. Vault and PVWA are already in the cloud, but other components like PSM, CPM, and PSMP are on-premises. It is not that all the infrastructure is on the cloud. There are a few components that are on-premises. However, in the case of on-premises, all the components are on-premises inside the infrastructure of the client, and they are responsible for maintaining that.

Our clients have seen an ROI.

If you want a Ferrari, it will cost you. The solution is really nice, so it costs the client, but in the long run, it is very good. If you buy a solution that costs a lot to maintain because it is not stable, and you are frequently asking for consultant support, it costs more. It is better if the client spends a little more money initially. In the long run, it is very good.

My recommendation depends on your needs and what you want to achieve. If you just want SSH, LDAP, and basic monitoring, you can consider other solutions like Wallix or One Identity, which cost less. If you need a lot of customization, such as you want to put in a lot of HTTPS ports and change the passwords of internal applications, this solution is much better than others. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I am an admin, and I use this solution for all our users. We have 80 users in our environment.

By implementing CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, we wanted to secure our environment and track everything.

We were able to realize its benefits within four to five months of its deployment after we had onboarded everything.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is cool. It has a lot of good tools, including everything we need. 

It could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I encounter issues, and I do not know what the issue is. It takes a lot of time to find the error and fix it. Sometimes it gives an error, but I do not know what the error is. I have to find the documents, but it does not provide all the details needed to fix the error. This is one of the day-to-day issues with CyberArk. 

When I contact support, it takes a long time to get help. They request all these logs, but they are not always relevant to my case. It is not always a definite help because I sometimes need help with issues that do not require any logs or device details. I am not sure if they read the case or not.

I have been using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for four years.

It is good. We had a ten-minute outage last month. That is all. We do not know the reason. 

It is reliable.

CyberArk's support quality has to improve because we are totally dependent on them. I would rate their support a five out of ten.

Neutral

I used to use Okta. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager has more features.

We had a third-party professional service that helped us to install it. It took about four or five months. To deploy, we worked with three people.

It does not require any maintenance. We just have to do the day-to-day operations work.

New users should have training before they sign up for CyberArk. CyberArk should provide mandatory training so that everyone implements it properly. Sometimes, new users do not know what is going on, and they open a ticket, which might be an issue from their end. CyberArk should have a new user training service so that everyone is familiar with it.

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

I am a senior manager, and we have multiple clients for whom we deploy CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. We also manage or upgrade their instances. We handle migrations and new implementations. We take care of anything related to CyberArk.

The feature that I like the most is the Privileged Session Manager. It offers session recordings, logging, and tracking of user workstreams. It keeps a record of activities, allowing me to easily fetch screen recordings to detect any misuse and see who did what and what happened. Its benefits can be seen immediately after the deployment.

Based on the user experience that I see on a day-to-day basis, some changes could be made to the Privileged Session Manager tool to make it more user-friendly. The user interface of that tool could be more advanced and understandable to laymen, rather than being more of a developer tool. I would recommend more user-friendliness there.

CyberArk is more focused on the cloud solution. They are not going towards on-prem, but a lot of clients still like the on-prem solution. With the cloud implementation, you have a lot of dependencies on expert services. When you get into some issues, you have to wait for expert services. They usually reply in two to three days. That is something CyberArk needs to make better. If they want clients to move to the cloud, they need to support them in real-time. The client should not be waiting for two days to get a response for the issue. If CyberArk wants people to pay for cloud services, they need to make the cloud services much more real-time.

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

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is a stable solution. I have never faced any issues with stability.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is a scalable solution.

I have contacted their support a lot of times. The quality of support is okay, but the time frame for replies should be much faster than it is currently.

Neutral

I have not used any similar solution for PAM. However, for managing the accounts, we have used some password management solutions such as 1Password, but they do not give you the accessibility and different components that PAM provides. They are just for password storage and keeping the passwords safe. A PAM solution from CyberArk or BeyondTrust solution provides a lot more than that, so we cannot compare them. There is no comparison.

I have deployed it both on the cloud and on-prem. My one client is on-prem, and another one is on the cloud.

The initial deployment depends on how extensive it is. For one client, it was quite easy, but after the deployment, it was tricky to deploy the components for AEM, EP, and CCP. On-prem implementation is much easier than the cloud. Cloud solutions require better and more immediate support. Cloud deployment is challenging due to dependencies on expert services.

It requires a bit of maintenance but not that much. Once you deploy the solution, it works, but there are always new upgrades. For example, if you deploy a web connector for web applications and Chrome releases an upgrade, you have to see whether CyberArk is supporting that upgrade or not. Accordingly, you have to update the drivers and other things for the web applications. The same goes with PSMP and SMP. If there are any version upgrades or any vulnerability patch fixes, you have to perform maintenance.

We help customers deploy it.

The duration depends on how big the instance is. To deploy all the components, the duration can range from three to six months.

It can be deployed by one person, but it also depends on how many instances of servers you are deploying, what is the concurrent usage, how many users are being onboarded, and what components you have. There is PSM. There is EPM and PSMP. It depends on what exactly the client requires. These are some factors that determine the time frame and number of people required.

From a client perspective, CyberArk's pricing is fair but there is a significant increase each year. They should limit the price increase because this could potentially drive customers to other partners. Price changes should be at defined intervals. There should not be sudden jumps.

I would rate CyberArk Privileged Access Manager an eight out of ten.

My primary use case for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is managing privileged access across the organization. I focus on auditing compliance and ensuring compliance with financial systems like SAP.

The benefits of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are typically realized over time, often facing initial resistance from various teams within an organization. While security, audit, and governance teams readily recognize the value of CyberArk, platform teams, and other stakeholders may resist its implementation. This necessitates a concerted effort to sell CyberArk internally, emphasizing its benefits and addressing concerns. Convincing internal stakeholders can be more challenging than securing buy-in from security or IT teams, often requiring three to six months after deployment for the benefits to become evident and widely accepted.

For me, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager's most valuable features are password and session management. It also includes technologies like Zero Standing Privileges and EPM, which I deploy for customers to demonstrate the return on investment.

CyberArk could enhance its usability by simplifying its architecture and design. Additionally, incorporating automated onboarding and offboarding features directly into the product would reduce the maintenance burden on administrators.

I have been using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for eight years.

I find CyberArk to be quite stable. Exceptions occur mostly due to user errors. It has a large customer base and positive feedback within my network.

On-premises scalability is challenging for me due to deploying various components on different servers, but I find SaaS to be more promising in scalability.

In my experience, the quality of support has been inconsistent. Response times seem to correlate with the strength of the relationship with the CyberArk account manager, with quicker responses when rapport is strong.

Neutral

I worked briefly with BeyondTrust but returned to CyberArk, which has been my primary focus.

In SaaS, most tasks are abstracted, reducing the workload compared to on-premise solutions where tasks like network configuration, connectivity, SSL certificates, and management fall on the user. However, SaaS solution eliminate the overhead of building VMs and similar infrastructure. Overall effort for both approaches is comparable, but SaaS offers the significant advantage of CyberArk managing the underlying infrastructure, including the vault and web interface, a feature most customers prefer today.

Initial setups were challenging for me at first, but with experience, they became more manageable. It generally requires reviewing documentation and seeking initial support from CyberArk. The deployments take between three and six months.

Implementation involves a project team with a project manager and Windows engineers for tasks like VM provisioning. Typically, I have executed projects primarily by myself, sometimes with minimal assistance from junior resources.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is more expensive than its competitors, such as BeyondTrust, Delinea, and ManageEngine PAM360. While ManageEngine PAM360 offers similar flexibility and support at a lower cost, CyberArk's SaaS solution is particularly expensive. This high price point has discouraged many customers from migrating from on-premise solutions to the CyberArk SaaS platform.

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

CyberArk manages the maintenance for the Privileged Access Manager.

Organizations must ensure users understand the importance of PAM and how it secures infrastructure. Training sessions, workshops, and demos are crucial for building user engagement and overcoming initial resistance.

For CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, use cases are providing just-in-time privileged access. The most simple use case is hosting all privileged credentials in a secure manner and managing and controlling access to those credentials. Therefore, controlling access to privileged endpoints is the usual thing that will be done with PAM.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager has several valuable features. The basic feature is privileged access management with all the processes and procedures that are needed. It has all the relevant features required to provide a PAM project or PAM program. It does everything that is needed. A tangible benefit is that we already have full control of privileged access. We have just started and have onboarded all privileged accounts into the system.

I have noticed areas of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager that could be improved or enhanced in integration with automation tools. It's not quite the same in the cloud, the Privilege Cloud version. The on-premises version allows users to do absolutely everything. When they took it to the cloud, they started cutting things out. The other issue with CyberArk is that they are marketing their new product, SIA, which is based on Privilege Cloud. Users still need to have Privilege Cloud to achieve the same level of functionality as the on-premises version.

We are still early in the roadmap and haven't progressed far enough to identify additional needs. When organizations reach the end of their maturity roadmap, they can better identify specific tool requirements that aren't currently available.

We have been deploying CyberArk Privileged Access Manager for two years now and counting.

The evaluation of customer service and technical support for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager depends on several factors. When receiving support directly from CyberArk, they are the most knowledgeable, though they don't always have immediate solutions as they might need to create them, which can take considerable time. For instance, the Ansible integration for the cloud version has been requested for years.

When working with CyberArk partners for support, it's crucial to ensure they have actual knowledge and aren't just acting as middlemen. There have been instances where third parties are hired to provide first and second line support, but they simply forward requests to CyberArk without adding value to the process.

We used a deployment partner recommended by CyberArk for the deployment and maintenance process. One crucial step that should be done first is creating an inventory of how privileged access is currently handled and where it is needed. Without this inventory, you might deploy CyberArk and realize it doesn't work with your existing architecture or infrastructure.

Our implementation team consisted of approximately 15 people, including architects, engineers, application owners, network specialists, Windows and Linux administrators, database administrators, and cloud specialists. While maintenance requires fewer people, input from all these stakeholders is crucial for successful implementation as they each have different requirements.

Most importantly, this needs to be a management-driven initiative with a top-down approach. Management must establish new working methods, as the biggest barrier to acceptance is typically resistance to changes in working procedures.

For ongoing operations, the staffing requirements depend on the company's operations. Typically, 24/7 coverage requires at least three people per shift in a follow-the-sun model. This accounts for first and second line support only, with additional staff needed for server maintenance, totaling around nine people.

The primary problem addressed by implementing CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the lack of control over privileged access - where it happens, how it occurs, and what is done with that access. When attempting to attack an enterprise, attackers target the highest-privilege credentials available. Therefore, protecting the most critical credentials within your organization is essential.

For those planning to deploy CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, it's crucial to understand that it's a multi-year program. It's not just about deploying the tool; it needs policies and governance around it. Additionally, infrastructure modifications are necessary to ensure PAM is the only way to provide privileged access to endpoints.

It's a great product that does everything required from a PAM tool. I would rate CyberArk Privileged Access Manager as a nine out of ten.

We use CyberArk Privileged Access Manager to manage privileged access, so all the privileged accounts are vaulted in CyberArk, and that's our control method to manage privileged access. We also manage access for developers, so we have dual control to give approval to developers.

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager has made our operations more streamlined. There is an approval process, so it helps us keep tabs on who's working on what and for how long. We also have to give a reason when we're using privileged accounts, which helps keep track of whether they're being used correctly. 

It's been good so far in safeguarding the infrastructure, but we've not used additional features of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. Modern PAM with secure web sessions or secure infrastructure access is something that I learned about at the conference. I am curious about how we can use it.

It has not helped to reduce the number of privileged accounts. Whatever we find privileged in the environment, we want to control that by using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. That's how we're able to control it. It has helped us identify privileged access better because we discovered users who didn't need privileged access. There have been cases where users with privileged access don't want their accounts in PAM because they need to pick up the password on a daily basis to perform their actions. There have been cases where they've gotten their privileged access off the account because it's not needed.

The user interface needs some training, but with a guide telling the user how to go about it, we have received positive feedback from whoever has used it.

It took us some time to realize its benefits because any new tool needs a proper understanding of how it can be used. A lot of testing was done on the engineering side, and demos were given. It took some time, but it is going smoothly.

Given that this is the only tool that I've worked with for the control process of privileged access, I don't have anything to compare it with. However, it's helped us keep our privileged access in check. We're able to get logs as to when the user checks out an ID and for how long, so it's a good monitoring tool.

They covered a lot at the conference. I don't have visibility into what product we've bought. It would be nice for them to approach us with what we have bought versus the new features being added. We need clarity on whether new features come included in the package that we already have, or if it's something that we need to have over and above.

Occasionally, there are lagging issues. Sometimes users have to re-login. When users copy passwords, there is sometimes a lag, so they have to log out and log in, but these are very rare cases.

I've been using it for about 5 years.

Occasionally lagging occurs. I've not heard about crashing, but there is a lag. Sometimes users will have to re-login and get it right.

The team that I work with is our in-house engineering team. I've had a conversation with CyberArk once last year revolving around efficiently generating the inventory reports. I contacted the technical support, but I didn't get a very straightforward solution that I was expecting.

We were developing a dashboard to find all the privileged accounts that weren't vaulted in CyberArk. We wanted the inventory report to be generated on a daily basis, but were having some trouble. We reached out to their technical support. The solution that they proposed was not straightforward because of the backend processes of CyberArk. We had to approach it in a different way.

Neutral

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

My use cases for CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are specifically for privileged access management. We are using it along with other products. They have access management, their own certificate manager, and other managers. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is for privileged access for users who require more than normal access, such as administrators and engineers. We can rely on this tool to manage that access.

You can see the benefits of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager immediately. This is risk management. You are not getting any features from the tool. It's not something that you are installing because you want it, for example, ChatGPT. With CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, you're getting control. You're not getting any additional features for your platform or systems. You are just controlling the risk. Users can't do what you aren’t allowing them. They can't make any change without approval, so it controls risks. Once you see that value, you're controlling what the privileged users in your system are doing.

The most valuable feature I find in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is that we can record the sessions. It provides flexible workflows. I can change the workflow to specify if it needs one approval or two approvals, and I can approve my peer. We can record sessions for external people who want or require privileged access to our systems. That is very flexible. We can record what people are doing in the platform.

I find it hard to mention a point of improvement because I'm happy with the platform. The only thing I would say is that they can improve their price. 

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

Regarding the stability of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, I have seen a couple of times that the server was not available. In three years, it has only been a couple of times. It has high availability and low impact. In terms of the platform, it is stable.

The scalability of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager has been good; the only thing is the license. The platform is very scalable, but you need to get more licenses in terms of users.

I don't handle that kind of interaction, but my engineer does. Sometimes it requires escalation, but I have not heard of any complaints from him in terms of the support received. It is good.

Positive

I have used Delinea but not in this company. I prefer CyberArk over Delinea.

It is not that easy. You need to load the users and platforms that you will be using. You need to teach the users how to do it. It requires some change management. It is a bit complicated, but it is expected. It is not just plug-and-play.

Its maintenance depends. You can have an on-premise solution or you can have a cloud solution. We have an on-premise solution, so it requires some maintenance on the infrastructure.

Its implementation requires a team effort

With the current model of licensing, for my use cases, sometimes it's hard to convince the management and get budget approvals for it. It's expensive and you're not getting anything new. It's just a control, but in terms of risk, you are covering a big impact on the company. Improvement in the licensing prices is something I would want to have.

I would rate CyberArk Privileged Access Manager as an eight out of ten.

I use CyberArk Privileged Access Manager to prevent exposing credentials for super-critical accounts, such as admin accounts and root accounts. I use it to protect these credentials and to avoid exposing them.

The module called PTA, Privileged Threat Analytics, is very useful. When you give access to a user, it monitors and detects if the user's behavior is unusual. After giving access, it continually checks if the user is the same user. It detects unusual behavior if someone else accesses the application.

The solution's architecture could be improved. It requires installation on four to five different servers. Each server has a purpose, but when you need to troubleshoot, it can be difficult because you need to access each of them. Reducing the number of servers would be helpful.

In the SaaS version, the number of required servers is reduced from five to three, but it is not completely cloud-based because servers still need to be deployed on-premises. Some clients are migrating from on-premises to the cloud. They do not want to use more servers or increase their on-premises data centers. They want everything to be on the cloud, but even in the SaaS version of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, they need to deploy some servers on-premises. That is not very helpful.

I started using CyberArk Privileged Access Manager in 2022, which was two years ago.

I have not experienced much instability. Sometimes, the issue lies with the server I deployed, but this is not very often.

In the on-premises version, scalability is difficult because server limitations can require buying new hardware. The SaaS version is more flexible, allowing easier scaling with increased users.

I contacted them more when I started to work with this solution. I still contact them but not so much.

I would rate their technical support a six out of ten. They are helpful, but complex issues can take a long time to resolve, which can delay solutions for urgent customer issues.

Neutral

I have used other solutions like Password Manager, but they were not very helpful because you use and store the same credentials, so there is a risk of exposing real credentials. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager allows me to create a random password and share it with a person, preventing the exposure of real credentials.

While some of the Password Manager solutions are free, they are too dangerous because they expose credentials.

I have worked with both on-premises and cloud versions. I prefer the cloud version because with on-prem, I need to install my own servers and maintain those servers. I do not have to do that with the cloud model. The responsibility belongs to CyberArk. I have fewer responsibilities as an administrator.

Initially, the setup was difficult to understand, but after three to four deployments, it became easier. It also depends on the kind of applications or servers needing integration.

In terms of maintenance, when the customer starts to use a new application, it needs to be integrated with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. Sometimes the new application is not 100% compatible. In such a case, the developer needs to create the integration.

In the first deployment, there was a team of two people.

Its price is high. I have also worked with Delinea. CyberArk is comparatively expensive compared to other PAM solutions, such as Delinea, especially during renewal.

It takes some time to realize the benefits of this solution. Customers take time to understand this solution. It also happened to me when I first started to learn how this solution works. I was looking for a solution to protect identities, and when I came across this solution, I found it hard to deploy as the architecture is complex. Still, in one month, I was able to understand the purpose of this solution.

Before deployment, I advise being clear about the applications to integrate and the users who will use them. Mapping this information beforehand will save time during production. You will not have to add them one by one.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.