Fudo PAM Reviews

The main use case is for protecting privileged user access, such as securing remote access services. Another important use case is when we work with third-party users and need to provide password management for privileged users. These are two additional main concepts.

When we talk about third-party users, it's a usual tool because Fudo PAM is a privileged access management tool.

We are referring to different users, such as IT administrators, database administrators, and third-party users. The users who connect to customers' manufacturers to solve outsourcing problems, etc. These are classic cases where we propose Fudo PAM to our customers and use it for our infrastructure.

Session recording and password management are the two main aspects. Also, there's the possibility to work with SCTP and STTPS sessions and establish a direct connection via Fudo PAM for rendering protocols.

Additionally, the Fudo PAM can work with database protocols like SQL and MySQL for controlling commands and working in proxy mode.

There are some areas for improvement in the Fudo PAM cake that we want to improve in terms of scaling.

Scaling is an optional feature because we closed some big projects with enterprise customers from different countries, including Ukraine, Kaloxetine, Uzbekistan, and others. We closed projects in different areas with customers of different sizes.

When we talk about enterprise customers, we should consider that they have different use cases and desires for Fudo PAM. We compared our options for customers to choose their vendors, and we discovered Fudo PAM has few scaling options. In Fudo PAM, there should be additional features for scaling and organizing remote sessions for remote systems in remote networks. 

I have been using this solution for the last three years. We use it in our own application infrastructure, and our customers also use it.

The stability of Fudo PAM is good, but we need to consider the new releases in some cases. For instance, the current version is 5.3, and customers who want a stable submission system should use only the finished and tested version. I would advise being attentive to new versions and not being too quick to adapt because the solution is very sensitive in the new version

Fudo PAM’s scalability is not very strong. But we can use a cluster of several appliances with scaling and rescaling options. So, we can quickly add or remove appliances to scale up or down.

However, I would like Fudo PAM to add an additional feature for remote networks. In relation to this, I would rate scalability a seven out of ten.

The customer support team of Fudo PAM is generally good. However, there are cases when customers want a fast response, such as for a search request, and technical support is overloaded, which can result in delayed responses. We have provided feedback to the vendor about the importance of timely feedback for customers.

Fudo PAM's technical support follows a standard approach, similar to other vendors. While it is generally considered the best technical support, it is important to note that during times of high volumes, such as receiving 100 to 1000 cases in a short period, it may take longer to receive a response. Customers may expect a fast answer during this short period, and if they don't receive it, they may express frustration. However, overall, this is a standard workflow when it comes to Fudo PAM's technical support.

Positive

I would like to provide a comprehensive evaluation of Delinea, One Identity, and Fudo PAM. It's important to compare these solutions, and I believe Delinea is currently the best in the market, with an evaluation of nine out of ten. Fudo PAM is evaluated at eight out of ten and One Identity at seven out of ten. As a product manager, I need to talk about more than one solution but provide a complex evaluation.

Regarding scalability, Delinea is the better solution because of its many models and additional two-platform on-premise and cloud. Fudo PAM is only available on-prem but can be deployed to different cloud platforms like Azure, iOS, and Google, which is not a weakness for Fudo.

As a product manager, I deeply understand what will help partners and how they work with PAM solutions. One Identity is also a good solution tool, and we work with several solutions. Overall, Delinea is the best solution in the market for now.

Setup is the strong point of Fudo PAM. It is very simple. I can complete it in just one hour, and then we can use it to its full functionality. All you have to do is click the button, download the clients, install the appliance on a VMware machine, and click the install button. After that, you can access all the solutions and functionalities in one console and one portal. I have seen this many times, and in many POCs, so many customers who use Fudo PAM say that it installs very fast and we can start working immediately after installing it. It is a strong point when we compare it with One Identity or other solutions because we don't need additional components like databases or servers. The prebuilt machine is very simple. If we compare Fudo PAM with other solutions, it is a very simple tool. Therefore, the deployment process is very simple.

It is reasonable and a good price. I know the old price for old PAM solutions. So I have a bundle card with several solutions with one identity. I prepared this bundle cart, including the Fudo PAM, of course, because we have additional PAM solutions with CyberArk. So for the parameter when we try to estimate the cost, the price list of Fudo PAM is a ten.

In a unified context, they added the licensing model on the users, a standard licensing model that is really useful for customers. Because before this, Fudo PAM had a licensing model only on a system-based and in the current session. And when we get the licensing model on the users, it became a six last quarter in 2023. It is really good because it is a simple, standard user approach to licensing and is related to the price list. When we talk about the price list, it is related to the licensing model. We can choose the most reasonable or best license way when we have several licensing approaches.

And with a good price, the customer can get the best offer or commercial proposition.

As a product manager, it's important for me to know both the strengths and weaknesses of our product. We distribute another solution called Delinea, which has some advantages over Fudo PAM.

When it comes to advise for customers, I recommend not being too fast to use new release versions for scanning, and instead using a productive regime on a productive system.

Another point to consider is when users want to get the best commercial offer, they should fully understand the critical resources, which will result in the best price. This is a practical piece of advice for customers. In summary, Fudo PAM is a great solution, and based on feedback from customers, it has been very well received.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I work for an IT integrator company. We're resellers.

I would like to see better server management. You have to know exactly what you're looking for to get the right server. Working with 100 or 200 server installations is comfortable, but not thousands. The scalability isn't very good because it's complicated. 

I would like more organization. For instance, they could add a table that matches an account to many servers at once.

There could also be better education services. They don't have any certification program, at least in Ukraine, so the training is complicated and divided into different pieces. Cisco, for example, has a great education program that starts from the basics and progresses to advanced features.

I've been working with Fudo for five years.

The solution is stable. I would rate it as seven out of ten.

It's not very scalable.

I would rate technical support as four out of five.

The main benefit of the solution is that it's very easy to set up. It only takes a couple of hours to install everything.

I would rate the setup as five out of five. 

The pricing is great. We've been given discounts that make it cheaper than using any other solution.

I would rate the cost as five out of five.

I would rate the solution as seven out of ten. 

My advice is that Fudo works best for small and medium businesses. The architecture isn't very good for enterprises.

The access management part of the solution is the primary part of the product that we use. The client that we have wants to limit user access to applications within the user's sessions. The client wants to keep logs about the users who are working on their servers. The main purpose is really to maintain these logs and restrict the use of applications in a user's session.  

We do not have a lot of detailed information about Fudo PAM from a user's perspective. We mostly have collected studies about the feature set and comparisons to other products. We were looking to answer some questions for customers such as if it were possible in Fudo to block a session if users try to run an application and other questions like that.  

From what we know and have seen, I do not think that Fudo PAM has to add much of anything to meet user needs. The ease-of-use for setting up session management and password management could be enhanced because they are really important for our customers and other users. The easier it is for them, the better.   

The initial setup and installation was a little buggy and took longer than expected. This part of the solution should be improved.  

We have not really been using Fudo PAM (Privileged Access Management) for a long time. Our experience with it is really just a one-off implementation for a client who needed us to use the solution in our project with them.  

To tell you the truth, I find that Fudo is not very stable and we had some issues during the implementation. It is working now, but it was not stable to start with and the implementation process should have been easier.  

From what we know of the product it is scalable. The clients that we serve want to have a scalable solution and this is one of the claims of the vendor.  

We are involved in working with some other security products in the antivirus and ESET (Essential Security against Evolving Threats) categories like Kaspersky DLC (Data Link Control) and EDR (Enhanced Data Detection and Response). We just want to be able to offer a variety of solutions to our customers and good information on products such as Fudo PAM. If we just provide Fudo PAM for our customers, the customers will want to know how other products compare and maybe which ones are better than the others. We have to study the range of products to know those answers.  

I think it is really important that the duration of implementation is short. This is especially true when you are doing the installations for a client. It does not matter which products we are talking about — whether it is Fudo or WALLIX — customers will want to have it deployed in a short amount of time. The time it takes for the implementation is really important. Customers want to implement and scale their PAM solution in a short time. This aspect of Fudo could be improved.  

One of our customers wanted to know about WALLIX and how it compared to Fudo. They needed to know the differences between them. We just want to get more familiar with these two products and be aware of the features and advantages so we had to study them.  

Right now we are encouraging our customers to use Fudo PAM because it is the only product in PAM technology that we have to offer them. Because we have looked into it, we are convinced that Fudo PAM is better than WALLIX. Living in Iran and providing security products is really the core of a business such as ours.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate Fudo PAM as an eight-out-of-ten. It gets and eight because, from my research, I think there are some ways that WALLIX is better than the Fudo. So in that way, Fudo has places where it can improve. We are judging that by our technical research, so I am not sure about it first hand as we have not actually used WALLIX.  

We use this product to control access and to administer computers and servers in our company. We are a reseller. We have engineers who configure Fudo Privileged Access Management and deploy the product for our customers. We also test Fudo Privileged Access Management and in the future, we will sell some technical instruments to go along with the product.

I cannot say much about this, because I use only the client. I do not configure the servers. A colleague that I work with has expressed some issues with the configuration. The configuration is difficult.

I think that Fudo Privileged Access Management is a very good program. For our system, it's perfect to control and administer computers in our company. We can usually find information or find what users are doing on our servers. Both the dashboards and the interface are good. I like this program and I like the front end and feature in Fudo Privileged Access Management.

We have been using Fudo Privileged Access Management for one month.

A colleague that I work with has expressed some issues with the configuration. The configuration is difficult.

I would rate Fudo Privileged Access Management at a nine out of ten.

We are a system integrator and this is one of the solutions that we provide to our clients. We also use this solution internally.

Fudo PAM is used for access management.

The most valuable feature is the interface. Fudo PAM was the most flexible and intuitive interface out of all of the products in the PAM sector.

This solution is easy to install.

Professional training and certification would be great.

Regional support in Ukraine is lacking, although they are new and do not have many offices around the world.

It would be helpful to have the ability to search for privileged accounts on endpoints, such as service accounts.

I have been working with Fudo PAM for approximately one year.

We have not had any problems with lag or instability.

We do not have very big installations, but assuming that it is cluster-based I think that it should be ok. I would rate scalability a seven out of ten.

Our customers are companies that range in size from 500 to 5,000 people.

We currently get our support from the distributor instead of the vendor directly. Our national vendor directs it. I would rate the support a seven out of ten.

The installation is easy and you can install the whole solution in two to four hours, maximum.

We are in the process of migrating from version 4.0 to version 4.2.

This is a solution that I recommend because it is a simple privileged access management system that is done very well. They're a company that directs all of their efforts to this specific goal and they do it great.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.