We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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 like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"Allows secure, logged access to highly sensitive servers and services."
"It is a central repository. Therefore, if someone needs to access a server, then they go through CyberArk PAM. It provides a secure way to do this and CyberArk PAM records everything. For example, if you are connecting to a Linux server, then once you get into the Linux server and if it is integrated with CyberArk, it will automatically start recording everything that is being done. In most banks, seeing the recordings is very useful. If there are any gaps or something has happened which shouldn't have happened, then we can check the logs and videos. So, it gives security, in a robust manner, to the organization."
"CyberArk has allowed us to get the credentials and passwords out of hard-coded property files."
"Enterprise Password Vault, Privilege Session Manager, and Application Identity Management have been very useful for our client environment."
"Ensures accounts are managed according to corporate policies."
"It is a robust product."
"The most valuable features of the solution are control and analytics."
"The interface with Panorama makes it very easy to use."
"The technical support for the solution is very good."
"It provides complete security posture from end-to-end. This has given us better visibility into what our security aspects are."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the zero-trust security architecture."
"The Palo Alto VM-Series is nice because I can move the firewalls easily."
"The VM-Series scalability is fast and easy to implement, improving our security posture as our Azure network grows."
"Palo Alto’s Panorama centralized management system simplifies our security posture based on our requirements. Instead of manually pulling logs, then generating them into readable formats, it gives us the console in a readable format to view."
"I like the UI. Most things are accessible from the user interface and it is quite user-friendly. With respect to both VM-based firewalls and physical firewalls, it's easy to create updates."
"When something comes out, it's generally airtight and works as advertised. However, sometimes they are a little bit slow to keep up with what's coming out. In 2017, for example, they released support for Windows Server 2016, which had been out for a year or so."
"The current user interface is a little dated. However, I hear there are changes coming in the next version."
"It should be easier to install. It is a comprehensive product, which makes it difficult to install. You need to have their consulting services in order to get it all installed and set up correctly because there is so much going on. It would be nice if there were an easier way to do the installation without professional services. I suspect they get a fair amount of their money from professional services. So, there is not a huge incentive."
"The initial setup was a bit complex."
"The documentation is rather basic and it is missing many use cases."
"One thing that could be improved is to create of a better alternative for fixing group policy fees. We currently use Microsoft, but they have introduced new policies that may not be compatible."
"In the beginning, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager didn't have a multifactor authentication feature, so that was an area for improvement, but now it's part of the solution. Having just one console for two CyberArk products would be good, particularly for the CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and the CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, with the latter being a product for endpoint management that supports the workstations and allows you to manage workstations. In the next update of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, it would be good to have a local agent where you can manage all users and processes, and have an agent on the servers such as Linux and Windows."
"The major pain point that we have is the capacity of CyberArk due to the sheer volume of NPAs that we are managing. We are a large organization and we have hundreds of thousands of non-personal accounts to manage. We have already found out that there are certain capacity limitations within CyberArk that might introduce performance issues. From my perspective, something that would be valuable would be if the vault could hold more passwords and be more scalable."
"It would be helpful if we had a direct number for the support manager or the supporting engineer. That would be better than having to email every time because there would be less wait."
"The command-line interface is something that some people struggle with and I think that they should have an option to go straight to the GUI."
"The product could be better in terms of performance than one of its competitors."
"The user-friendliness of the UI could be improved."
"In the next release, I would like to see better integration between the endpoints and the firewalls."
"The interface is all Java-based. I would prefer an HTML5 interface."
"The utilization monitoring and GUI have room for improvement."
"With Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, it is hard for me to manage its network configuration part."
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 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". 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 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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.