We were using CyberArk, but we switched to One Identity Safeguard because it was costly. Everything was good with CyberArk, but we needed to scale, and the licensing costs were high.

We are still evaluating other options before choosing One Identity Safeguard, but so far, we see that One Identity Safeguard is much better.

We are still evaluating other options before choosing One Identity Safeguard, but so far, we see that One Identity Safeguard is much better.

Before choosing One Identity Safeguard, I evaluated other options based on simplicity, price, and functionality.

CyberArk, which is essentially the industry standard right now, is doing a very primitive job of helping the administrator with the task, and One Identity Safeguard is a lot better at this.

I evaluated other options such as CyberArk and BeyondTrust before choosing One Identity Safeguard.

I previously used One Identity before switching from CyberArk to One Identity Safeguard.

I previously used SailPoint, but One Identity Safeguard is better in terms of product features.

We are using One Identity Safeguard only and did not use a different solution before.

We have not evaluated any other options, as we had confirmed from day one that we were going to procure One Identity Safeguard.

The trend show consolidation within the IAM market and cross-product solutions is becoming the new standard.

Before finalizing One Identity Safeguard, we evaluated a few leading PAM solutions in the market. Some of the key options we considered were CyberArk, BeyondTrust, and Delinea (formerly ThycoticCentrify). Our evaluation criteria included ease of deployment and implementation, user interface and usability, session management and monitoring capabilities, integration with our existing environment (AD, cloud, or SIEM), and cost and licensing flexibility.

Earlier we were using a mix of manual access management and some basic PAM tools, but we switched to One Identity Safeguard for better automation, strong security controls, and easier auditing. We did evaluate a few options before finalizing One Identity Safeguard. The main ones we looked at were CyberArk, BeyondTrust, and several others. CyberArk was very strong but felt a bit complex and costly, and BeyondTrust was solid for remote access and monitoring. In the end, we chose One Identity Safeguard because it fit better with our hybrid setup and integration needs.

Before finalizing on One Identity Safeguard, we evaluated other privilege access management solutions, such as CyberArk and BeyondTrust. CyberArk is a strong market leader with advanced features, but it can be complex to implement and manage. BeyondTrust also offers good capabilities, especially for endpoint privilege management and remote access, but we found One Identity Safeguard to be more aligned with our requirements in terms of ease of use and deployment flexibility. We chose One Identity Safeguard because it provides a good balance between security, usability, and integration capabilities, particularly with Active Directory.

I previously used a different tool for managing, but it lacked centralized control, proper auditing, and security features.

Before choosing One Identity Safeguard, I evaluated a few other privileged access management solutions, such as CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server, and BeyondTrust Privileged Access Management. These are well-known options in the market and commonly compared during the evaluation.

We evaluated a few other privileged access management (PAM) solutions before implementing One Identity Safeguard, including CyberArk and other enterprise PAM tools in the same space.

Before choosing One Identity Safeguard, we did evaluate a few other enterprise PAM solutions. The main ones were CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and BeyondTrust Privileged Access Manager. We compared them mainly on session recording and monitoring capabilities, ease of deployment in hybrid environments, and integration with Active Directory. One Identity Safeguard stood out because it offered a strong balance of deep session monitoring and solid integration with our identity stack, along with easier appliance-based development.

Before selecting One Identity Safeguard, we evaluated other privileged access management solutions such as CyberArk, BeyondTrust, and Delinea, but we chose One Identity Safeguard because it offered a strong balance of security, ease of use, and integration capabilities suited to our environment.

Before selecting One Identity Safeguard, we evaluated a few other privileged access management solutions, including CyberArk and BeyondTrust. We chose One Identity Safeguard based on its features, integration capabilities, and ease of deployment within our existing infrastructure.

I have previously used a different solution and it was a good experience.

During the evaluation phase, we also looked at other PAM solutions such as CyberArk, BeyondTrust, and Delinea. We compared them on security features, integration, deployment complexity, session monitoring, password vaulting, scalability, and overall operational requirements before selecting One Identity Safeguard.

I previously used a solution called Microsoft Entra ID; it was expensive and not easy to operate, which is why I decided to switch.

Before choosing One Identity Safeguard, we did evaluate a few other PAM solutions. The main ones we looked at were CyberArk and BeyondTrust, as they are among the most well-known enterprise PAM platforms. We also briefly considered solutions such as Delinea for comparison. These tools offer similar core features such as credential vaulting, session monitoring, and privileged access control, but each has its own strengths. For example, CyberArk is known for its maturity and deep PAM capabilities, while BeyondTrust is strong in combining privileged access with remote access features. In the end, we chose One Identity Safeguard because it provides a good balance between functionality, ease of deployment, and cost for our environment, with strong session monitoring and analytic features.

While selecting One Identity Safeguard, we evaluated other options, but they were not aligning with our business needs, so we chose One Identity Safeguard instead.

During the evaluation phase, I looked at a few other PAM options to compare capabilities, especially around session monitoring, ease of administration, and integration with my existing AD environment. Some of the commonly discussed alternatives were tools such as CyberArk, which is a very strong tool, and also a few Microsoft native approaches combined with Azure-based identity controls for privileged access management.

I evaluated solutions including CyberArk Privilege Access Management, BeyondTrust Remote Access, and Microsoft Entra ID before selecting One Identity Safeguard due to strong Active Directory integration and simplified Linux and UNIX authentication management.

We were using a PAM solution from Automation Anywhere but switched due to issues with their licensing and lack of support.

We did evaluate other options before choosing One Identity Safeguard.

We evaluated a few other privileged access management solutions, including CyberArk and BeyondTrust, but we chose One Identity Safeguard because it offered the right balance of privileged access control and password management features.

Different options were evaluated before selecting One Identity Safeguard. PAM solutions, including CyberArk Privilege Access Manager and BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, were considered. One Identity Safeguard was selected because it offered a good combination of privileged access controls, password vaulting, auditing capabilities, and ease of administration that matched the requirements.