We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management and BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management 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."100% compliant and you don't have to maintain ID management for each and every user."
"For compliance, each change I do, in each of the servers, is clearly recorded. We recently faced an audit and this was an awesome feature. Even our auditor had praise for it saying, "This is really a good feature.""
"It gives us a lot of comfort in terms of security level. Our infrastructure devices and servers are secured and nobody can have unauthorized access to them."
"The initial setup was very simple. There was only one server we had to setup. We needed to store all the passwords, and a secure database is used."
"The video logs help us to identify any misuse of privileged accounts."
"Session recording is the most valuable feature, as it covers compliance and it also covers our in-house applications."
"Logging, particularly screen recording for Windows RDP sessions. Also, command-logging for SSH sessions. This really helps us to see what commands/changes have been executed in a particular service at a given point of time, and by whom."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not complex at all."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The features related to application elevate is amazing. It helped the company to remove almost all admin local users."
"The solution's least privilege enforcement has helped us ensure access is given to only the required people."
"The privileged access and the application control are helpful in making sure we have good, robust challenge responses. Blacklisting with trusted application protection is also beneficial for us."
"One of the valuable features is the absence of any local user in a unique system. All users are defined in the AD; communication is only between Unix and AD."
"The asset discovery feature is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's very easy to pull assets into the database of the solution manager."
"I find the solution’s features like section management, password management, and analytics valuable."
"It is straightforward. It is a good technology, and it is made to do one single thing."
"If an ID gets locked, the tool cannot unlock it, making it an area where improvements are required."
"If you take Microsoft hypervisor - which comes with its own interface, its own web layer, etc. - something like that also requires privileged IDs. As per our institution policy now, everything has to come through ARCON. We have demanded that these kind of advanced features also should be there."
"I would like for it to be dependent on Windows as opposed to Linux."
"Managing users is difficult, so that is something that can be improved."
"Sometimes it gets stuck between servers and I would like to see this improved in the future."
"The deployment process is a bit complex because no document is available."
"It would be helpful to have a "Favorites" list. For example, if I have 100 servers but I only go to 10 servers frequently, a Favorites list would allow me to go through those ten servers only."
"There are no APIs readily available... I'm working on automation for ARCON so that whatever the ARCON administrator is doing will be automated, rather than having to do it manually. For that, I had to spend months to get the API developed myself. Having that handy out of the box, that would really help..."
"A valuable enhancement could be the capability to deploy agents directly through the console."
"We use a program to automate all of this, but it's not a default feature of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management."
"Their technical support could be more responsive and helpful."
"It keeps on breaking every now and then. It is not yet mature. Every time something new comes up or we run into some new issues, the culprit is BeyondTrust because the agents and the adapter are not mature. The new development process goes on, and they're not able to handle things. It should be mature. It shouldn't break every now and then."
"Reports to the end user."
"It should support XWindows Remote Desktop Access protocol for Linux/Unix."
"They are doing good for now, but they should start to consider tight integration with Mac solutions. There should be more integration with Mac. There should be Active Directory (AD) Bridging. Thycotic and Centrify have it currently because they merged and joined forces, and it was a feature available in Centrify. So, basically, they joined forces to create a kind of perfect product. If you have a hybrid or mixed environment with Windows and Mac, your Active Directory can only manage or enforce policies on Windows, but what about your Mac devices? How do you control them? So, AD Bridging will act as a bridge to bring all your Mac devices into your Active Directory. This way you have full control over your entire environment."
"What's bothering me, which is true of all of them, is that sometimes, the error codes that come up don't necessarily get reflected in the searches within their support sites or they're out of date. I would rather search by an error code than type in the text and search for it by text because the error code means that it is programmatic, and it is known. It might not be desired, but it at least is not unexpected. If you don't have an error code, you just get an anomalous error, and if it is lengthy, it can be difficult to search and find the specific instance you're looking for. This is something I would like all of them to improve. BeyondTrust, CyberArk, Centrify, and Thycotic could do some improvements in staying up to date and actually allowing you to search based on the product version. They are assuming that everybody is on their way to release. They put out a new release, but it is not reflected on the support site, which makes no sense to me, especially when they revamp all the error codes. They all have been guilty of this in some way."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management is ranked 8th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 32 reviews while BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 5th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 28 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8, while BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management writes "Offers good session monitoring and recording features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management writes "Admin rights can be granted and revoked within minutes and that is what everything comes down to, for us". ARCON Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), ManageEngine PAM360, WALLIX Bastion and Delinea Secret Server, whereas BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is most compared with CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management report.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
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.
