Delinea Secret Server Reviews

One valuable feature is that it will support a dedicated database. Delinea provides multiple features, like reporting and remote password changes.

The UI needs improvement because the interface is a little clumsy.

I've been using it for almost two years.

It's stable.

It is scalable and is better than other solutions. We have 400 users in our company.

We can't say that technical support is good because they respond according to their time zone, and we are not in the same time zone. I would give them a six out of ten.

The deployment was not difficult and took one and a half months.

We have an enterprise license as well as a user license and a support license.

I can recommend this solution and will rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We use Thycotic Secret Server for the lab environment. We have it as a vault for users and in a client project. We have set it as the users' mass login to the secret server so they have access to their SVN. It is for remote access, password changing, etc...

We use it on premise, mostly. I haven't used the cloud version, but we are discussing with the client about using the cloud deployment.

Its most valuables feature are its main purpose - the password changing and the Heartbeat so the user has access to only their SVN and does not have access to any other. Thycotic's access privileged management tool allows you to grant access to users for a specific period of time and with specific attributes and privileges.

In terms of what could be improved, the whole thing with distributed engines, et cetera, is a little bit tricky. Additionally, many clients wanted a more cloud version. I know there is a cloud version of Thycotic Secret Server, but a whole unified platform would be good, not like where you have to set up a connector with the distributed engine and then have the Thycotic Secret Server connect with all these. Making a simpler version of connecting different sites and synchronization of the groups that you already have. Then the secrets and folder templates would follow the current infrastructure pattern that the client has so you don't have to recreate new folders and secrets from scratch. In other words, more interoperability with other systems, for example if a user already has a Microsoft Azure subscription. So, the integration with Microsoft as well would be good.

We have been using Thycotic Secret Server for about a year and a half.

In terms of stability, I would say, yes and no. We had some issues regarding the size of the disk space, which was a Thycotic side issue. There were many log files that they couldn't delete. And then we have another issue with the service account. We have to use another service account for Thycotic, and there was a mix-up with the database. All these issues were from the Thycotic side.

We're logging the tickets and I think there will be a resolution in the future.

Scalability is okay.

We use it for lab environment uses. We have about 20 users, not too many.

It takes one person to deploy in our environment.

We do have plans to increase. We have a live contract and other client requests for Thycotic, including maybe the cloud deployment. I hope it is not as tricky as on premise. Maybe it's easier, I don't know.

The initial setup depends on the client. That's why Isaid earlier that there should be a simpler version where we connect all the different sites, et cetera. Because for client installation and deployment, you have to set up two different servers for high availability, for example, and connect another through your site connectors for the distributed engines, and the client didn't have any load balancers. So, there were many issues and the Thycotic was a little bit tricky at that moment. It wasn't just a simple solution where you set up a server and you have it up and running. 

The other thing is, and I think it's important, there is not much documentation on the internet. Besides the partner portal it would be nice if there was a blog or something that we could use. So for most cases, we have to open a ticket, either us as partners or on the client's side.

Our license is yearly.

Thycotic Secret Server is a good solution for what it does. We are happy for that, but maybe they can improve some features. Let's say the keystrokes function doesn't work. We have reported that to Thycotic, but they still have many improvements to do.

On a scale of one to ten, I think Thycotic Secret Server is an eight - maybe.

The primary use case is managing access for user groups and individuals in a very large environment.  

One of the best things about Thycotic is that it is very easy-to-use. It is logical, it has well-designed screens and a nice GUI interface. It has good performance and is generally a pleasure to operate.  

If you look at Thycotic, it is a great product that has pretty much all the same features as CyberArk — which will be replacing it. There is not much difference between the two. We will be switching away from using Thycotic, however, before the end of the year.  

The catalyst for the change was a formal comparison of the two products that we did using each to evaluate how we would use it in solving actual use case issues. In the presentation of the scoring over specific categories, CyberArk had slightly better professional service marks and the same price. Besides that, the two products were neck-and-neck and almost identical in the scoring. CyberArk just came out just a little bit better than Thycotic in the details, and not by much at all. Be that as it may, the formal comparison is the reason for the change.  

Thycotic has been in use in our Healthcare system for four years.  

Thycotic is a rock-solid product. Our organization never had any issues with it.  

If you consider the shere physical size of the Healthcare environment, you can tell from that just how scalable the product is. Not every product can handle 55,000 network elements and 15,000 servers.  

The technical support for Thycotic is very good as might be expected. The members of the support team that I have been in contact with are very much on the ball. Thycotic has  excellent service staff.  

This will be the last year Thycotic will be in operation at Healthcare in Norway because it will be replaced by CyberArk at some time this year.  

I think there are some very small things in Thycotic which are a little harder to do, and that is only because the Healthcare environment is so large. Healthcare has 55,000 network elements and 15,000 servers. One of the few things that CyberArk does better than Thycotic is to more neatly group IT assets in smaller bundles using a 'safe' that could be assigned to groups or teams for access. By comparison, Thycotic — at least in the versions leading up to the competition — lists all the assets at one time, no matter how many there are. When there are lists which are 15,000 elements long, it is harder to locate items and divvy up the work. So it was some slight usability things like this that really made the difference in the outcome of our comparison.  

While this organizational feature in Thycotic was not so good, some other parts of the user interface that are included in it are really fabulous. Thycotic is more intuitive and it is more logical in many ways than CyberArk. So I really like the Thycotic product. But for this very large environment, it turned just to be slightly less applicable to our situation than its competition.  

As I probably indicate from my answer, if it was not for the fact that we did a formal comparison and scoring of the products — following the objective measures that we have to follow when we buy things in the public — we probably would have done well just keeping Thycotic. But when you follow the Government process and the idea is to be absolutely impartial, then the way the scoring is set up is the way it goes.  

I think the pricing of Thycotic and CyberArk products are very similar.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Thycotic as probably a nine. That is only because I have to rank them slightly lower after we decided to make the switch to CyberArk, and replacing a product that is a ten would not make a lot of sense. So a nine-out-of-ten it is.  

Thycotic is a product that is so friendly that it can be used by nearly anyone and everyone, and that is a good place to be. As for the limitations in a very large environment, Thycotic could invest in making changes in the product to handle structuring in a segmented way. It would be costly for Thycotic to make that investment, but for Healthcare as a user group, that would have been the difference. We have already bought another product, so we are not going to change our minds again, but it may be worth considering for the team at Thycotic.  

I would probably recommend Thycotic for most businesses because it is simpler and easier to deal with than CyberArk. So really, I would recommend it to all businesses except for the extremely large ones.  

We use the most updated version. 

One of our customers wanted automation in respect of the solution. 

I really like the zero trust piece. 

The initial setup and deployment can be cumbersome.

I have been using Thycotic Password Reset Server for about a year.

Nothing about technical support gave me room for pause. 

The initial setup and deployment could be simplified.

I do not have knowledge about costs or fees. 

When making a decision about which solution to purchase, it often comes down to a choice between Thycotic and CyberArk. The cost and features one gets with the latter provides a little more value and saves money in the process, although the former is somewhat easier to deploy and to get up and running. 

I rate Thycotic Password Reset Server as a nine out of ten. 

One of our clients primarily uses it for automation capabilities. 

The zero-trust PIN is a great feature of the solution.

Technical support is pretty good. 

The ability to automate is a good selling feature.

The initial setup and deployment can be cumbersome. It's not an easy process. 

I've been dealing with the solution for about a year.

Technical support is okay. I've dealt with bad tech support services on other solutions, however, in the case of this product, nothing jumps out at me as being a negative experience. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide to us. 

I also have experience with CyberArk.

The difference between the two is basically that CyberArk gives you a bit more value for money.

I have found the initial setup to be difficult. It's not exactly simple or straightforward. It's a downside to the solution. 

I can't speak to how much the solution costs a month. I don't deal with the licensing side of things. 

I'm a reseller. 

We tend to deal with the most up-to-date versions of the solution.

When making a decision, it often comes down to Thycotic and CyberArk. What we found is that CyberArk, for the features and the cost, gives you a little bit more value and saves you money in the process. Between CyberArk and Thycotic, Thycotic is somewhat easier to deploy and get up and running. Essentially, with Thycotic, you get the value quicker. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

The surveillance is most valuable.

The discovery of accounts could be improved. It is also very expensive, and its price should be lower.

I'd prefer a better commercial model that includes partners and options for consulting around it. Where I've worked with my customers, we've only been able to use their professional services, and that has been a risk and constraint.

I have been working with their products for 10 years.

Their technical support is all right. Some of the open-source stuff isn't supported properly, but generally, it is pretty good.

Its initial setup is easy.

It is very expensive, and its price should be lower.

I would rate Thycotic Secret Server a six out of 10.

I'm working in India in a private IT firm and we are working as a consultant for Thycotic, and Azure Development.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it provides us with a secure way of managing passwords. 

I also like the integration with the Active Directory of the Windows platform. It is really good.

Thycotic has a roadmap for moving to the cloud. The cloud version is also really good.

It would be helpful to have integration with various platforms, such as Azure Active Directory on multiple platforms. Adding this type of feature can add to Password Reset Server.

I would like to see improvement with the integration with Azure Active Directory. This would mean that we can have support on multiple platforms such as Windows, Linux, and Mac.

Currently, it is a standalone application, but if it could be combined with other Thycotic products, it would be a good on-premises, as one platform. It would be altogether a very good package.

I have been working with Thycotic Password Reset Server for approximately one year.

This solution is stable.

Technical support is very good.

The initial setup is very easy.

They are priced quite well.

I would rate Thycotic Password Reset Server a seven out of ten.

The most common use case will be just for keeping personal passwords. There are other things that we use if for, but that is the most common use case.  

The ability to manage personal passwords is what it was built for and that is what makes it most valuable.  

The main part of the product that could be improved is the API (Application Programming Interface). The Thycotic API is not very good.  

I have been using Thycotic Secret Server for a couple of years. It could be as many as four.  

I guess this should be considered a stable solution. There has been no downtime this year.  

There are about 1200 users that are using this product at our organization. We are going to continue to use it at least for a while, but we are looking for some alternative solutions because it is not that good and there are better products available that can do what we need better. It seems to be able to scale with our user base.  

I do not have any experience with technical support because I am not the person managing the product. We do have an internal IT crew that takes care of the application and they would be the ones who would be in contact with technical support if it were necessary.  

When I came to this company, Secret Server was already in place. I do not know if the company may have had something in place before this. There is a consensus at the corporate level that we will continue using Thycotic Secret Server.  

I do not think it is particularly straightforward if you do anything more than install it and turn it on. I do not have any feedback on the process of the installation itself because I did not install this product. as a DevOps, I find that modification is not straightforward.  

I believe it was implemented in house by the team. We have maybe two people on staff who take care of this application.  

I think that Secret Server is expensive when I compare the cost to some alternatives. There are different plans and additional licensing costs that can be added on, but I do not know the details exactly within our company.  

I would not recommend this product. I would not because the basic functionality is okay, but we need some API access to use KPI (Key Performance Indicator) properly. We also need to automate some stuff using this secure vault. Attempting to do that is almost impossible because of the low quality of the API.  

Me, speaking as a lead DevOps, I would not recommend it for this office. It is not the best choice for what we need.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate this product differently depending on what level or type of user is using the product. For the DevOps purposes, my rating would be zero. Each year it is less competitive and it can not be justified for the price.  

In general, for end-users, I do not know. They are not exposed to the development end so I think they might give it a five-out-of-ten.