We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Netgate pfSense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."We have accomplished our security goals. We have two-factor authenticated and vaulted our important accounts, so people can't just steal stuff from us."
"We utilize PTA, and we are now integrating that into our risk management program so we can identify the uses of the vault which are outside of the norm, e.g., people accessing after hours. It has reduced the amount of time that we are looking through logs and audit logs."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution include password management and Rest API retrieval of vaulted credentials."
"Securely protects our TAP/NUID and privileged access accounts within the company."
"We are able to rotate credentials and have privileged account access."
"We are able to centrally manage credentials, touch applications, and rotate passwords."
"Performance-wise, it is excellent."
"Increased our insight into how privileged accounts are being used and distributed within our footprint."
"The performance and functionality are good."
"What I found most valuable is the cost of the platform, the flexibility of the platform, and the fact that the ongoing fees are not there as they are with the competitor. Some people may think you're taking a risk with using Opensource. I think it just provides the end user, specifically for us small, medium business providers of services, the flexibility we need at the right cost to provide them a higher end, almost enterprise type service."
"We generally use it because it's cheap. When we need something more robust we use Barracuda and Sony Wireless Routers. For certain clients, we use pfSense because it's compatible with the VoIP platform."
"What I like about pfSense is that it works well and runs on an inexpensive appliance."
"Content protection, content inspection, and the application level firewall."
"The "OpenVPN Client Export" package is really helpful in exporting the VPN client software on most popular devices: iOS/Android, Windows, Mac, Linux, and a handful of SIP handsets."
"The most valuable features of pfSense are security, user-friendliness, and helpful online management."
"It is much simpler than other solutions such as Fortinet."
"The interface on version 9 looks old."
"Over the past seven years, I have seen a lot of ups and downs with the product."
"We need a bit more education for our user community because they are not using it to its capabilities."
"There is room for improvement in the availability of custom connectors on the marketplace for this solution. Additionally, their services for the CICD pipeline and ease of integration could be improved."
"This product needs professional consulting services to onboard accounts effectively based user profiles."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager could improve the integration docking, it should have more layers. For example, integration with OpenShift."
"The current interface is not very intuitive."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"Also, the GUI is helpful, but it's not user-friendly. It's complicated. It should be more intuitive for the average user and have an excellent graphical view. Of course, the user will typically know about network administration, but it still should be easy to understand."
"pfSense could improve by having a sandboxing feature that I have seen in SonicWall. However, maybe it is available I am not aware of it."
"I would like to see pfSense integrate WireGuard. Currently, pfSense uses OpenVPN, and there's nothing wrong with it, but WireGuard is a lot leaner and meaner."
"We would like to see ready-made profiles to cover most users' needs."
"If a user doesn't have a large amount of experience in Linux systems, they will have problems using this solution. Users need to be highly skilled in troubleshooting competency. Users who do not have such skills will find the product difficult to use."
"Web interface could be enhanced and more user friendly."
"Reporting and real-time monitoring, since I'm used to Watchguard's reporting features, it would be nice to have an embedded solution for reporting."
"Needs services on additional features, such as managing inventory and generating reports."
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 Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. 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 Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". 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 Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, KerioControl and Sophos UTM.
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.