We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiClient based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are able to centrally manage credentials, touch applications, and rotate passwords."
"Automatic password management, which will automatically change passwords based on compliance requirements."
"The regulation of accounts is by far the most needed and valuable part of the application."
"The automatic change of the password and Privileged Session Manager (PSM) are the most valuable features. With Privileged Session Manager, you can control the password management in a centralized way. You can activate these features in a session; the session isolation and recording. You apply the full intermediation principle. So, you must pass through CyberArk PAM to get access to the target system. You don't need to know the password, and everything that you do is registered and auditable. In this case, no one gets to touch the password directly. Also, you can implement detection and response behavior in case of a breach."
"You can write different types of policies for custom business needs or any developer needs. If they need certain functions allocated, they can be customized easily."
"The most valuable features of the solution are control and analytics."
"Rather than multiple tools for maintaining regulatory compliance around passwords and privileged accounts, we have centralized as much as possible with CyberArk. This is now a one stop shop for end users to access their elevated credentials."
"Right off the bat, the most valuable feature is the DNA scan. It gives us the ability to scan our environment and find the accounts that we're going to need to take under control."
"It is a feature-rich product that is easy to use and install without sacrificing security."
"The return on investment was very reasonable. It was low cost and it functioned, so the return on investment was excellent."
"The solution is easy to configure and manage."
"Having a centralized console is a valuable feature. The Fortinet fabric is also very valuable where all different pieces talk together to secure our network and track the North, South, East, and West movement of files and data through our network."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its integration capabilities. The processing is fast and the reporting is also very good."
"The integration capabilities are good."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's easy to install and connect and has OTP on email IDs and two-factor authentication."
"The service is centralized."
"Overall what I would really love to see is the third-party PAS reporter tool pulled more into the overall solution, ideally as its own deployable component service installation package."
"Some of the additional features that we are looking at are in the Conjur product. I am specifically discussing key management, API Keys, and things for connecting applications in the CI/CD pipelines."
"The continuous scanning of the assets is limited to Windows and Unix. We like to have the solution scan any databases, network devices, and security devices for privileged accounts. That would be very helpful."
"The admin interface of the Password Vault Web Access (PVWA) is moving from an old style (the classic interface) to a new style (the v10 interface) and unfortunately, this process is quite slow."
"Make it easier to deploy."
"Integration with the ticketing system should allow any number of fields to be used for validation before allowing a user to be evaluated and able to access a server."
"The interface on version 9 looks old."
"It is web-based, but other competitors have apps. We need to get there. It is just smoother to have an app. You don't have all the bugs from having a browser, and people like them better, since you can get to them via mobile."
"It would be nice to see more in hand features in terms of the DLP, so that the solution can be integrated with the DLP, as well as more reporting features on the end point."
"The only thing that is lacking in this product is the support. Their support can be improved."
"I don't think FortiClient is bad, but it's very buggy. We ran into some issues with the EMS, which amounted to more than 10 cases last year."
"I would like to see endpoint detection and response included."
"The user interface on the central server could be improved."
"We've had some problems with having to remove the current version and either reinstalling an old version or updating to the new one."
"The software inventory part is not yet up-to-date. It doesn't have a great interface, which is a disadvantage. I wish we could leverage it, but we don't use it at all because it's not that reliable."
"When we change our endpoint, we have to connect again, which means having to enter our credentials and permissions."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 14th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Fortinet FortiClient report.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.