RSA Archer Reviews

RSA Archer is a governance tool, used especially for bank applications. At the same time, there is the NetWitness tool, a SIEM solution that was created by the RSA division. They have integrated the incident management, along with RSA Archer. Whenever the SIEM solution creates alerts, Archer can be triggered, and you can elect notifications to your mailbox. 

If you click on the link, it'll link to you the actual incident, what happened in cybersecurity. You can do a number of things, like a workflow and approval from the manager level.

The features help save a lot of time in the organization.

The most valuable features of RSA Archer are the asset management, risk management, and vendor management. It's a very simple tool that you can learn within a short period of time.

If I use an AGP, for the onboarding process, for example, I'll create a workflow. An item will go to my manager, the manager approves, and I'll automatically get an alert notification sent to me saying that you are being onboarded. 

You can also put a lot of limitations, like permissions and values, in the AGP. As a security person, that is important to me. You can use any number of groups and permission levels. Now I created vendor management and many people have different kinds of applications in the AGP. Many people are users, but that doesn't mean each particular person can access all the applications in the AGP; it'll be limited. At the same time, I also can give edit permissions at the system level.

One area that could be improved is the solution needs to go further with most of the APIs. They need to create multiple APIs and integrations, in my opinion. A few things can't be done from the RSA level and it's not user-friendly when you're working with the other tools. With the RSA products, it's very easy, because it's an inbuilt application. If you need to integrate the RSA products with another SIEM solution, then it doesn't work properly. You have to create a new API for that integration of Archer.

Beyond that, additional features would make the solution too complex. If additional features were added, the solution would need better sustainability and marketing. RSA would also need better online support. The solution would be more attractive with improvement to these items.

I've been working with RSA since 2013.

The stability and performance of the solution is good.

The solution is easy and simple to scale.

The initial setup is not complex; anyone can do it. Deployment should not take more than two people. The time it takes depends upon the cluster environment. If it's a single instance, you have only one database server, it shouldn't take more than four to five hours for the deployment. If it is a cluster with a lot of employees and a big organization, they'll have disaster recovery and more involved. In that case, it'll require at least two days or so.

We are involved in the integration of everything.

The license is costly for the solution, but the remaining setup and maintenance is a lot cheaper.

The RSA Archer tool is useful for governance listing, workflow, risk management, incident management, and auditing. It's a very easy methodology for senior management. In Archer, even though it's confidential data, you can store it in the proper way, and there were a lot of APIs which can integrate with Archer. For senior management, it'll trigger an alert and you'll see a project automatically to approve. You can do wonders with this tool, but you have to be very specific in your utilization.

If you only use two to three products in RSA, you're wasting a lot of money and people resources. You have to bring awareness; what is this tool? Show users the solutions that can be implemented.  

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I am using RSA Archer for internal audit management. It is used for the entire life cycle for audit, which includes engagement planning, reporting, action management, and so on. It is also used for internal resource management. The timesheet management, resource management, and training are being managed through the same system. 

It has been deployed on-premises. My organization has 16 groups. It is installed and managed centrally by the headquarters, and we are using the application.

We got rid of a lot of paperwork. As an internal auditor, we have to comply with IIA guidelines. There are standards that we need to follow while completing an engagement. A lot of requirements have been automated through the system, such as quality assurance, engagement review, audit follow-ups, and so on. It has supported the organization as a whole.

It is highly customized for our organization. It is primarily for GRC, but we are using it for audit management, resource management, timesheet management, and so on. These were add-ons features that were customized and developed by the vendor.

Its user interface is pretty neat, and there is flexibility in generating the data. You can customize reports at any level. You can directly get reports in Tableau format. If you want to generate statistical data, you can create reports with graphs. There is an adequate amount of flexibility for changing the format, the type of graphs, etc. 

The dashboard that is a part of the RSA Archer could be more aesthetic. 

There should be a way to export and get data from the system in PDF or PowerPoint presentation format. This would be a great addition.

It has been almost two years since we have been using the product. We have been using it almost on a daily basis.

We have been using the web application, and sometimes, there are issues related to the network availability, etc. Other than that, we have not seen any issues in terms of performance and input and output controls. We never had any reports that were not correct. So, more or less, it is fine.

Scalability-wise, we already have a proven case. Deploying a solution in one company with a fixed, organized structure is one thing, but deploying at a mass level in multiple companies and bringing them all together in one single platform is a completely different thing. It proves the scalability of the solution. There is no doubt that it can be scaled to multiple organizations in one go.

We have more than 200 users. They are internal auditors, but if we also count the auditees who use the same system, the number would be much higher.

Our version of RSA Archer is heavily customized. Therefore, at the initial stage of the deployment, there were a few issues for which we needed support. We had a few workflow issues or anomalies in the reporting. 

At the organization level, we have a uniform IT management system for IT tickets. We have an IT support team at the group level, and then we have a support team in headquarters. It is being managed just like any other solution in the organization. We are satisfied with the support.

I have seen the deployment of the SAP-based audit management system in 2013 or 2014, which might have changed a lot over these years. From a user's point of view, RSA Archer has a better user interface. It is easier to use. SAP had a typical structure and user interface. It might not have been user-friendly for everyone. RSA Archer is more user-friendly. Its acceptability is much higher when you are deploying it in an organization.

It followed the usual SDLC life cycle. They came and understood the processes. They understood the way the audit was being managed in our organization. It was a joint effort between our organization and the vendor. There were a lot of sessions to understand how we conduct our processes and what are the challenges that we face. Bringing almost 16 to 17 companies in one single platform was a challenge in itself. Even though we had the same policy procedure, there were some differences in the way things were being done, the formats of the files that we were using, and the way people were doing the audits.

It took a lot of time to have a good base of the design itself, but it was worth it. The deployment was done phase-wise. It was not a single-phase deployment; it was a multi-phase deployment. Initially, we just implemented the basic audit management in which we were able to create engagements and add the findings. Later on, more complexities were added related to quality management, timesheet management, detailed reporting, and so on.

It required a lot of interaction with the group companies and the development team in the HQ. There was one whole team in the HQ that had 15 to 20 people. From each company, there were about two to three people. It was a big team. My estimate is that we had at least 20 to 30 people.

The initial deployment probably happened in a span of six months. Every quarter or every six months, they take feedback from different companies, and they ask for whatever modification is required from our side, and they keep on releasing the updates, small modifications, and so on. It is a continuous process, and we are still fine-tuning the system.

I'm not an administrator, so I don't have information about the maintenance it requires in the backend. Because it is heavily customized, whatever development happens, it happens only internally. The production and the development environments are optimized. Apart from that, the routine activities that we require are related to any data modification with reference to the audit parameters of the attributes. We usually request to change or modify them. There is also an approval process. These are the kinds of interactions that we have as users.

There is absolutely no doubt that it is a very good tool for audit management as a whole. If you are deploying RSA Archer, the most important thing is that you need to be very clear of your requirements and the processes for audit management. It can maintain the organization hierarchy, business hierarchy, processes, projects, and assets. It can maintain a lot of repositories and attributes related to an organization for mapping individual audits. It is a wonderful tool, but if you are not clear about how you want to deploy it, it could be a mess. This is applicable to any enterprise-level tool. 

The reason I'm certifying with RSA Archer is that when you are using it for audit, there is a particular strategy and the way to do it, which may vary from organization to organization. So, you have to be very particular about what you want from the tool before deploying it. You should not deploy it and then define your processes. 

I would rate RSA Archer a nine out of 10.

Our use cases for Archer include third-party management, enterprise risk management, and compliance management. We have a partnership with RSA Archer and I'm a manager in risk advisory.

Among the most valuable features of this solution is the easy implementation and the degree of automation that it offers. This product is very compatible with our business processes and the dashboarding features are creative. This is an easy tool to learn and to work on. They have a great community where you can ask any question and be sure to get some responses. 

Archer has evolved significantly over the last five to eight years, but there are still some areas that could be improved. We've noticed recently with the advanced workflow jobs that we're receiving some errors. It's a showstopper for us and it's clear that some kind of development support is needed. If there were an improvement in the design and the advanced workflow, jobs would run more smoothly, and a lot of value would be added to the business. Another aspect that could be improved is the UI which has a very old generation feel. For additional features, I'd very much like to see tools added in the next release. This could include a live connection that could be built in order to bring all the client data from the legacy system directly into Archer. Right now it's a data feed. There are currently some ActiveX options for live collections, but not for all the products. 

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is stable, it's a very mature product and if anything goes wrong we can provide the answers or the Archer community has the answers. We are currently having some problems with performance and our clients are complaining. The issues are with calculations and advanced workflows and it's creating a slow down in the system. We probably have around 5,000 users through our client companies.

The solution is very scalable. The design approaches Archer provides are very easy to change and scale. In an agile project, it's very easy to handle or develop with most of the configurations based on drag and drop as per the document framework.

Most of the issues we've had to escalate to RSA support belong to the advanced workflow section. These problems cannot be solved by Archer's UI and require back-end support or technical support from RSA. We're satisfied to a degree, it can take a few days to get a response. 

The initial setup is straightforward, the complexity lies in the operations. The entire configuration project requires minimal manpower. Archer has a built-in wizard where you can either create a package and send it to the higher environment or just install the package. It doesn't take more than half a day. In the latest versions, we've seen that some of the features are not automatically deployed and manual checks are required. We're expecting to see that rectified in future versions. 

The licensing is more expensive than other similar products and it often makes our clients step back and go for cheaper options. That said, the company is very clean and transparent in terms of pricing. There are no additional costs.

I have experience working with other GSU products and as a competitive analysis, I'd rate RSA's capability above that of other products. RSA Archer is more mature in terms of providing solutions. It's only when you compare the UI between solutions that Archer's competitors have an advantage. 

This is an easy solution and it's very good for agile projects when requirements can change abruptly. The only concern we have is with the advanced workflow which should be simplified so that if any errors come up, it's easier to change or modify. I recommend checking the target environment for all the configuration areas, making sure that it has been properly deployed, and checking whether it needs some post-deployment checks.

I would rate the solution very high but because of the error messages we've been receiving which require technical support and cannot be fixed by the Archer UI or the Archer configuration interface, I have to bring the rating down. If they improve the UI, I'd rate them more highly. 

For now, I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

It is used for enterprise risk audit, corporate compliance, and vulnerability reporting like threat management reporting. It is a whole suite that has different products depending on what you want to track and report on.

I do use the SaaS version, but I have also deployed it on-prem, and I also have experience with the original cloud version. The one that we deployed originally on the cloud was on AWS, but now they do everything on SaaS.

From my perspective, because I've always done it as a consultant, I do like the way it is configured. They've gone into changing the application builder interface, so it is even easier. When you're working with users, it is really easy to show them how to do things quickly and how to configure, change, and design stuff quickly.

Some of the error reporting isn't very clear. When you're looking for information on error codes, you got to do a lot of digging.

I've never seen any major issues.

Its scalability is very good. Because of the way they've set up their licensing, it's now very easy to scale, especially if you're using SaaS.

We have over 60,000 users across all departments. Some users just go to check the status. I would think it is being used extensively.

It has changed over the last six months, and it is a little bit more challenging. When you have to report an error, you can't really find a lot of detail online. You have to open a case file, and then after opening a case file, it does take some time for resolution. From one to five, I'm going to rate them a 3.5.

It is very straightforward. The documentation that they provide is clear in terms of the instructions that you have to follow through. It is very well documented. Most users and techs can follow it, even with very little experience.

For its deployment, usually, there are one or two people. You don't need more than that because it's a very easy product to upload. If you're doing it from scratch where you have absolutely nothing, it is about a half-day setup.

It requires very little maintenance. Their upgrade packages are pretty quick, and it is easy to do the upgrades. It is very user-friendly, and even if you have no tech background or you're a new Archer administrator, it is very easy to do.

Its ROI is quite high when you look at how long it takes for people to input stuff for compliance risk, vulnerability management, and threat management. The centralization of data allows you to get a pretty high return on your investment pretty quickly because it's really easy to implement. It doesn't take like a year. You can do it in less than two months, depending on the solution that you want to implement. The customization opportunities with reporting are also pretty high.

I am not 100% familiar with that, especially with their new model. I just know that the way they've licensed per user to scale is good.

I would advise others to know their requirements going in because there's so much flexibility with the product. You could over customize it just because it allows you to do so much, but sometimes too much of a good thing is not a good thing. If you know your requirements upfront, your road to success is short, but your return is high.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

We use the product for policy management, vulnerabilities and risk management. We also use it for business continuity.

It is a good tool to use. The product is very flexible. It can easily connect to other tools like ServiceNow and Nexus. The workflow feature is very interesting. We can automate a lot of stuff using the workflow. The product makes it very easy to publish dashboards.

We are implementing COBIT 2019. It is in English. It would be useful for customers if COBIT 2019 could be translated into different languages.

The product’s scalability is pretty good.

The initial setup is not complex, but you need some knowledge of the methodologies in the market to implement the product. These methodologies are in English. We have to translate the methodologies to use in Brazil. It would be better if it were available in different languages.

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

We use RSA Archer in my organization for assessments (ISO, GDPR, PCIDSS, etc.) or to raise dispensation for any application, security-related controls.

If we want to perform the application assessment or any ISMS assessment, earlier, we had to do it manually. The RSA Archer tool gives us the output in an automated manner, it is beautiful and has helped our organization.

RSA Archer is the most usable GRC tool and leading tool and I have found performing the application, ISMS, and TPRM assessments beneficial.

In a future release, there should be an option to upload the main data.

I used RSA Archer within the last 12 months.

Early on we faced lots of issues because the communicating with the RSA Archer, the database was not synced properly. Two times when we installed RSA Archer in an environment a few settings and configuration was not correct, this caused the passwords not to match.

The stability could improve.

The scalability is easy to achieve.

Most of our clients are large businesses. I have plans to continue the usage of RSA Archer.

The technical support is good, but they respond a little late, sometimes it can be a few days to have a response.

Positive

The initial setup is a bit complex. The whole process can take approximately three hours with one or two people.

We have faced challenges. For example, the database is not synced with the RSA Archer. A few services were not running if the RSA Archer was logged in through local admin or the specific user, we have received few errors. 

Archer is responsible for the maintenance of the solution.

The ROI depends on the company's needs as RSA has 7 solutions, the company can pay based on the subscription. 

The solution's price should be reduced. You only have to pay the license and there are no additional fees.

I did not previously evaluate any other solutions.

They have to use RSA Archer if they use the automated tools, their data will be safe.

Though there are some issues with the technicality of the solution, such as errors. The solution provides great features, such as customization, we can customize it as per our requirements.

I rate RSA Archer a ten out of ten.

We use Archer as a risk management portal. We've customized Archer to follow the Sherwood Applied Business Security methodology for governance and risk assessment. We don't use the compliance module much.

The main benefit is that we can automate risk management. The whole purpose of having Archer is to automate governance, risk, and compliance. Previously, we used to do everything in Excel sheets and Notepad. It was mostly manual. We'd send emails to people and collect information. Once you have Archer, you can automate all these processes.

I like how Archer requires very little programming ability. A person with minimum coding experience can configure the necessary fields in Archer. It's more of a drag-and-drop solution. 

When we have to do formulas or some other type of calculation in Archer, it sometimes doesn't work correctly. The fields don't display right, and we have to contact RSA Archer support to fix things. I think the calculation components are a bit complicated.

I've been using RSA Archer every day for the past six years.

RSA Archer's overall performance is good. It slows down at times whenever a script or some process is running in the backend. Sometimes our users have complained about the speed.

Scaling up RSA Archer is a straightforward process. You just need to upgrade your hardware and software. We have about 80 end-users working on Archer now. 

We've opened several tickets with RSA, and they're settled pretty quickly. The experience has always been good. 

When we started working with Archer, it was more or less the only product in the field that could do GRC automation. A few have been launched since then, but we've only ever worked with Archer.

Deploying RSA Archer is effortless. You just need to make a database backup of Archer and keep it somewhere. Then you can install Archer on any server and load the backup. Everything from A to Z comes back. It's restored, and you don't have to do anything. It's a straightforward process. The initial installation takes three hours, and two technicians can handle the job. 

After installation, it doesn't need much maintenance. We periodically deploy some security patches on the operating system, make backups, and cross-verify if the backup is working correctly or not. 

The initial purchase is cheap. You pay a nominal price to start then renew the license annually. You also must buy a license for each module. I'm not too fond of that aspect of the licensing model. You buy the elephant and then spend more money to feed the elephant.

I rate RSA Archer seven out of 10. To anyone thinking about deploying Archer, I would suggest exploring other products in the market as well. Archer is a bit costly compared to its competitors. 

My primary use case varies depending on the requirements, but uses include working on email notifications, fetching data feeds, and working on feed managers.

Archer allows us to define the progress of the organization's processes and helps build the right cyclic process and improve the current structure. We also track a lot and transfer a lot of vendors and users, and Archer has a repository that allows us to collect that data step by step. It also makes auditing easier.

The most valuable features of RSA Archer are notifications, workflow routing, and data filtering.

An area for improvement is the turnaround time for advice from the support team. In the next release, I would like to see a maturity rating feature that would provide industry ratings and information on the market.

I have been using this solution for about a year and a half.

Stability has improved over time, but there's still a lot of latency with some features, like looking up or checking the database.

This solution is scalable.

The tech support team's turnaround time is often slow.

Previously, I have used Aravo, and currently, I'm using Process Utility.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward as we were given hands-on training. Deployment took around three months.

When implementing Archer, I recommend looking through the videos supplied and making use of the free sessions that Archer provides. I would rate this product as six out of ten.