We use One Identity Safeguard to manage our privileged accounts.
We use One Identity Safeguard on both physical and virtual appliances.
We use One Identity Safeguard to manage our privileged accounts.
We use One Identity Safeguard on both physical and virtual appliances.
One Identity Safeguard uses a secure remote access feature that does not use a VPN. This is important because it is cheaper and more secure than implementing a VPN for remote access.
People can start using the solution after five days of training.
We don't need to use VPN for remote access.
One Identity Safeguard is slow and not user-friendly.
Managing remote access for privileged users is difficult because it requires a lot of customization.
Current integration with other solutions requires custom API development. I would like to see out-of-the-box integration built into One Identity Safeguard, similar to other solutions.
The deployment affects our privileged users because it takes a long time for them to request privileges, which impacts the SLA.
I have been using One Identity Safeguard for nearly three years.
One Identity Safeguard is unstable. Many bugs affect its performance, particularly when generating bundle batches and performing discovery.
One Identity Safeguard is scalable, but its performance degrades as it is scaled up.
Customer support is a nightmare. They take a long time to respond to tickets, and when they don't understand the issue, they stall by requesting logs.
Negative
I previously used BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, which is a better solution because it includes recording and remote access out of the box, whereas One Identity Safeguard requires us to integrate each of those components separately. Additionally, each component is a different appliance.
The initial setup is straightforward. The installation takes a couple of hours. One person is required for the deployment.
One Identity Safeguard is expensive and the cost goes up as we scale.
Licensing fees increase as we expand, as does the cost of basic support, which allows us to open tickets. Additionally, we must pay to update outdated appliances.
I would rate One Identity Safeguard three out of ten.
I only recommend One Identity Safeguard for small businesses.
When using One Identity Safeguard, we need to be patient.
I work for a bank, and we use Safeguard to manage access to our Internet banking services. We use Safeguard for two things: identity and access management and detection recording. We have our services onboarded on SysTrack doing RDP directly to the servers or station, and we use virtual appliances for collection. The solution covers around 150 users at this organization.
I like Safeguard's snapshot feature that enables us to review the last time an application was opened and by whom. If there are any issues, we can look behind the scenes to see what has been done. We can suspend a user's access or close off a server.
We've had issues managing accounts and access to some data saved on the servers. Accounts are granted a new working certificate daily. We have an account to do it on APIs online and sync it with that. If the path changes at some point or someone changes the password, I don't know if it's from the Active Directory or what.
I have used Safeguard for one year.
Safeguard is stable.
It's scalable, depending on the solution case. I don't know if it's domain-based because it was not restricted. We're gradually moving to the Azure cloud.
One Identity support is okay.
Deploying Safeguard was straightforward.
I rate One Identity Safeguard eight out of 10.
We use Safeguard for managing privileged passwords only, using physical appliances.
So far, I haven't seen any type of improvement from using this solution when compared with other products in the identity and access management space. It has been neutral.
I like the discovery functionality and the change password feature through the check-in. I also like the bulk import with the help of templates that come with it out of the box. With the help of these few features, my tasks are made easier.
We also use the Secure Remote Access feature for privileged users. Access is based on group membership and with that membership they connect to the remote machine. It's an easy process to manage.
The main thing that needs improvement is the slowness. Apart from that, the change password check-in feature also needs improvement because it is not working perfectly accurately.
I have been using One Identity Safeguard for the last two and a half years. I work as an implementer and provide support operations to our clients.
It's not a stable solution, but it's not bad. It's neutral in terms of stability.
It's not scalable.
We are not using their Premier Support, but I am okay with the vendor's regular support. But if the product is running on an unsupported version, that is a very negative point. They should support unsupported versions as well so that their customers are not stuck somewhere in between.
Neutral
As an organization, we are using other PAM solutions for other projects, but I'm not sure which other solutions are in use.
The initial setup for Safeguard is straightforward. Because it was deployed a long time ago in our organization, before my tenure, my expertise is based on adding to clusters. If we are going to add clients within a cluster, it depends on the speed, meaning how the network connectivity is between the cluster and the target device.
In terms of the effect of deployment on users, they are provisioned, with the help of group membership, into Safeguard. Once they are assigned to a particular group, they can follow the previous sites. Based on the previous site, they can log in and check out the password of their privileged account.
As for the amount of training needed, it depends on the solution. If the solution is only for privileged passwords, about three weeks' training is required to understand the solution. And if the server for privileges is also integrated with the solution, it will take a month or as much as 45 days.
We have an implementation team and an operations team. Between them, there are a total of five or six people required for this solution to deploy and maintain it.
I'm not aware of the product cost, but if it's going to cost more, first they have to maintain and stabilize the product.
My impression of the form factor of the Safeguard physical appliance is not good and not bad. It's neutral. Similarly, feedback about the usability and functionality is neutral.
My advice, if you have the budget, is to buy other products, like CyberArk Privileged Access Manager or BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management. If you don't have that kind of budget you can use this product.
We use it to link our virtual systems. We have Windows and Linux, and we have some applications. We use One Identity Safeguard to connect to them. We also use Password Vault, and we do session monitoring.
I am one version behind the latest version. I usually wait before doing an update to make sure that there are no problems with the new release.
One Identity Safeguard helps with accountability. We now know which person is accessing which machine. It also helps to make sure that they are secured, and that everyone knows what changes they need.
We have used the transparent mode and non-transparent mode for privileged sessions. The transparent mode is more difficult than the normal mode, but with the help of the documentation, we figured out how to do the necessary configuration and use this mode. Generally, we use the normal mode. We do not use the transparent mode.
We use the Secure Remote Access feature for privileged users. It was very easy to manage remote access for privileged users by using this feature. When our users cannot be physically present at our place, they can access the resources using the Starling account. It is easy.
The Secure Remote Access feature does not make use of a VPN. This is very important for us because there are some problems with using VPN, so it is easier to use something like Starling. We can be sure that our users can access the network even from home and that the sessions are secure.
I have worked with other One Identity solutions. I have used One Identity Defender, One Identity SPP, and One Identity SPS. They worked very well for our users. We also use the authentication service to control the Linux machines with Active Directory accounts. They work well with each other. I have also used Safeguard Remote Access. I tried its features with Safeguard to allow our users to connect to the sessions by using the cloud so that they do not need to log in to the company servers.
One of the most important aspects is that it is very easy to use and install. It is also agentless, so all of the operations happen more smoothly than any other product. Our end-users find it easy. They have a web application. They only need to enter the credentials, and they can access the Safeguard session. They can use it very fast without any problems. Its learning curve is very low.
We can discover Windows and Linux machines, but we would also like to discover databases. It is very important for us. I have heard that in the new version, we can discover databases, but I have not tried it yet, so I am not sure if the new version does it properly or still needs some work.
We would like to have the option of importing assets by using the CSV file. It was available in the earlier versions, but it is not available now.
I have been using this solution for about two years.
It is very stable. They always release new updates if there are any issues. For example, for the Log4j issue that happened a couple of months ago, they released an update to solve the issue and make sure that no user is affected by it. It is based on the Linux machine, so it is very stable.
I did not face any problems. It is very scalable, and it can be used for a small company or a big company without any problems.
Currently, there are about 20 users who are using it.
We have used their regular support, not the premier support. When we have any problems related to it, we open a ticket. They always help us. We might have to provide them with additional things so that they are able to troubleshoot better, but they are always helpful. I would rate their support a 9 out of 10.
Positive
We did not use any other solution.
The initial setup is straightforward. We have two installation types. We have Safeguard for Privileged Passwords and Safeguard for Privileged Sessions. For Safeguard for Privileged Passwords, we just need to import and the whole organization will be done. The process for Safeguard for Privileged Sessions is also simple. There are no problems.
The deployment duration depends on the number of systems, the number of users, and the number of applications. In a small company, it might take about two weeks or three weeks.
The deployment did not affect our privileged users. We just needed some time to get used to it. We were not using any PAM product before, so it took some time to get used to using it. It is more restrictive than the Active Directory system, but it is for the best.
For managing and deploying the solution, I took technical training. It was about five-day training with One Identity. After that, I started its deployment. In case of any problem, we could check several resources. We could check the administration guide or forums. We could also open a support ticket with One Identity. For the end-users, I gave the training, and it took one or two days at the most.
I deployed it myself.
We checked out a couple of solutions, but I was not a part of the selection process.
It is a very easy solution. In case of any problem, you can contact the distributor or the vendor, and they will help you.
I have worked with physical and virtual appliances. We went for virtual appliances because they are easy for us. We have servers in our company, so we have the space and resources to install them.
I would rate One Identity Safeguard a 10 out of 10. I have used it for some time, and I enjoyed working with it.
With Safeguard, there are two virtual appliances. There is one that helps you manage passwords and then there is another one that helps you record the sessions. You can configure it to record whatever you do when you make the remote calls.
We use this solution for a bank. My current project is to onboard all the bank's security assets onto Safeguard. It will be used for admins to have secure access to the server.
The part of this product that I like the most is the transparent mode. That is the number one advantage of the product. I also like the ease-of-use. That is what Quest is known for. The interface is interactive, relatively easy-to-use.
I like the fact that we are using a proxy server. Also, I like the fact that it is integrated in such a way that I can connect to my Linux and Unix resources using my AD credentials. They map the AD credentials to Linux accounts. So, when I am connected to my AD accounts, it acts as a sort of proxy to convert it to the Unix account that it is configured for. That is quite useful.
The only part of the Safeguard solution that I think could be a problem over time is the amount of storage it takes in the sessions. For example, because it records in real-time video it takes a lot of resources. So, it has not been a problem yet, but we are looking at a solution where we allocate the cost of that additional capacity differently. Then there will be enough resources to compensate for whatever the storage needs are. It just takes a large amount of storage for each current session.
Another thing that I would like to see them improve is that I would like them to make the transparent board a little bit more transparent. The transparent mode is something I use often and it is the best feature of the product but that is also why I see how it can be improved. It might just be a little bit easier to use.
We are a long-time Quest partner and have only been using the product for the past five months. We just got onboarded to the One Identity product. This is my first project with One Identity.
One of the things I really like about the One Identity solution is the fact that it can be configured in active-active cluster mode. It is just a little pricey because you have to purchase the additional licensing just to be able to do an active-active configuration.
But I like it also because it is a virtual appliance. This means I can configure a high-availability cluster anyhow I want. If I have it on a VMware cluster, I can enable high-availability or any virtual cluster solution that makes sure it is highly available. I would do that using VMware storage. This makes it a more stable and flexible solution.
The fact that I do not have to worry about other incidental things is good. I am not connected to an external database server. So all the dependencies, patching, and additional setup is something I do not have to do on the One Identity appliance. Everything is on a hardware appliance. In other words, I do not really even have to worry about securing my security device. It may not be the first thing to think about, but because you deployed a security device, now you have to worry about securing it. As it is all-in-one as a hardware appliance, I do not have to worry about all that.
We have not had any issues with scalability to this point and it is handling our capacity and needs. The only potential issue would be budgeting for additional licensing, which would not be a problem in our case, and handling the resource usage. These are not really limiting.
Between the banking client and our company, not everyone has been onboarded yet to the One Identity Safeguard. But in the end, we are looking at probably about 500 servers and I think a total of about 180 admins. This seems realistic using this product.
My impression of support is that the guys there are very helpful. They are eager to jump in and to help you out. Yes, I think it is a great service.
I think that the initial setup was very straight forward. Pretty much a piece of cake, actually. With our implementation strategy, the deployment actually took only about two hours. That is including the discovery of the assets. It is a relatively large enterprise network, so discovery can potentially take some time. This was very reasonable.
The approximate cost on a yearly basis is in the ballpark of about 80 grand, $80,000. That is for about 100 servers. That is the standard license fee. There are not really any additional costs once you purchase that. Sometimes you can have professional services included with it. For example, if you take a week of professional services or if you need them to do the install. That is the only additional charge.
As a long-time Quest partner, this was an easy choice to make. Because we were already partners it made sense to work with their other solutions.
The advice I would give to organizations considering this solution would be that before they make a commitment they need to try to find a local support resource. They will want to be able to get local support because that can be critical. But otherwise, I think it is a good product and a good buy. I would buy it again. As a partner, I would also sell it again because I am confident in it as a product and a solution.
On a scale from one to ten, where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate the One Identity Safeguard solution as a nine-point-five out of ten. I'm very happy. If I have to choose an integer, it would have to be a nine. Ten would mean it is perfect and there are things I think can be improved.
We use the on-demand version. We use the solution for monitoring and connection to the customer's server for Windows and Linux.
It's easier to connect to the server and it makes it more secure. We've seen about a 40% improvement in that regard.
The monitoring system is very good.
It has a very nice user interface.
The product is very fast to implement.
We use the solution's transparent mode for privileged sessions.
There is a lack of documentation and many problems with the plugins.
I did run into problems with transparent mode for privileged sessions. We didn't connect correctly to the server. It was an issue we had with the customer's server, not the product itself.
The security of the connection could be improved.
I've been using the solution for one year.
It's not completely stable. Sometimes the newest version does not support an older version.
The solution is not so scalable.
Mabe 20 or so users are leveraging it in our organization. They are admins.
We use regular support. The response times are too long. Sometimes it could take days.
Positive
I previously used CyberArk. I changed companies, and now I work with this product. I find Safeguard to be easier to implement, however, it does lack documentation.
It is fast to implement.
While the process is not technically complex, there was a lack of documentation and we had to figure out how to do it ourselves. The deployment took three weeks. We had two people working on the process.
We have yet to witness an ROI.
The solution is offered at a good price. We pay a monthly fee. I'm not sure of the exact cost we pay.
I'm a product partner.
We are using the latest version of the solution.
I have yet to use the cloud assistant feature, so I can't say much about that aspect of the solution. We also do not use the solution's secure remote access feature for privileged users. We don't have it integrated with DevOps or RPA.
While basic knowledge is important, there isn't much training required to start using the solution.
I'd rate the solution six out of ten.
One Identity Safeguard is used by administrators to access their devices. They will log in using identity management in order to secure the administrator's login.
One Identity Safeguard can improve by having more integration with multiple devices.
I have been using One Identity Safeguard for approximately one year.
I have found One Identity Safeguard to be stable.
The scalability of One Identity Safeguard is good, we can add multiple devices.
We have approximately 40 administrates using this solution in my organization.
We plan to increase usage in the future.
I have not contacted support.
The initial installation was simple.
The full deployment took approximately a couple of months. Not because of the One Identity Safeguard, but because of us, we were busy doing other projects in parallel.
We used a third-party vendor for the implementation and we had a good experience with them.
My advice to others is One Identity Safeguard is a must to have because it's part of the cybersecurity framework, such as Nest ISO. We should have an identity management solution to manage the whole identity, such as privileged users.
I rate One Identity Safeguard an eight out of ten.
We primarily use the solution to manage passwords and use for the RDP access.
Our infrastructure is three SPPs and two SPSs. This is across 1,000 users and approximately 500 targets.
Safeguard can define and update processes and procedures into the security framework of a company, including mobile. It allows us to change the policies and configurations on a mass scale in regards to security.
The most interesting thing about this product is it is very easy to implement and configure as well as its usability. Also, for the final user, the work experience doesn't change when using the SPS for the Linux administrator, which is fantastic. You change only a little bit of the connection. Everything else is really easy.
I just received a question from a customer in regards to a connection with Oracle OID. I tried to integrate Safeguard with the Oracle YAML as well as something else to manage the groups and users from a different system, like AD or LDAP. This one feature could be better. At this moment, the platform system can only use the integration with LDAP or AD. The software for research and development to create a connector to a YAML platform can be very complicated.
I started using it two years ago.
It is a very stable system. There are no problems when using the platform.
The scalability is fantastic. It is very easy to connect and use the solution, if you need it.
There are two different supports: one for SPS and another for SPP. The technical preparation of the support is very high. They have very quickly given me the solution for a couple of issues that I have seen.
We switched from CyberArk to Safeguard. In order to manage CyberArk, it is a very big effort. The platform is very complex. The management system of Safeguard is very easy. Also, the configuration for the targeted user is easier in Safeguard rather than CyberArk. Lastly, the cost of CyberArk's licensing is very expensive.
We try to understand what the customer needs in order to fit the solution for what they want, then we plan all the activities based on that.
We can deploy the system in a couple of days, then the system is up and running. The next step is importing the whole system. The time frame of this depends on many targets the customer has, but it doesn't take too long.
I work at a system integrator, designing and implementing the solution for our customers. I think our customers see a return of the investment using this solution.
Safeguard is cheaper than CyberArk.
It is a good solution. There is no limit to its usage in a company, e.g., IT or financial.
Check the basic rules in the documentation because the solution is easy to use.
I would rate the solution as 10 out of 10.