We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiSandbox 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."AIM has been a great help in automating password retrieval which removes the need for hard-coded credentials."
"We are maintaining compliance in PCI, SOX and HIPPA, which is a big thing. Auditors really like it, and it has made us stay compliant."
"The fact that I can put my vault here in a central location on one net for example, and I'll have a CPM in California, a CPM in Texas, a CPM in New York, a CPM in Florida, and actually be able to grow with my company and not necessarily have to continue to grow my vault until I get to a certain number accounts - yet I can still manage everything across the country, if not the world - I love that. I love the flexibility and the capability of being able to pull those components out."
"The central password manager is the most valuable feature because the password is constantly changing. If an outsider threat came in and gained access to one of those passwords, they would not have access for long."
"The automatic password management is the most important feature. The second most important feature is the ability to enforce dual control on the release of those passwords. The combination of these two features is the most important thing for us because we can show that we're in control of who uses any non-personal account, and when they do so."
"The technical support is good."
"The users have the ability to rotate passwords on a daily basis with a Reconcile Account. Or, if they want to do one-time password checkouts, we can manage those, check in, check out. I like the flexibility of the changing of the password, specifically."
"The most valuable features of the solution are control and analytics."
"The dynamic behavior analysis is excellent. We have many attacks caught by the FortiSandbox as zero-day attacks. Additionally, the administration is simple and can be customized to fit your companies needs."
"What I find most valuable, is that it is easy to use."
"Overall, it works fine. Its interface is also fine."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox is faster than other sandbox solutions."
"It is a stable solution."
"The product is great. It can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiSandbox are the analysis options, artificial intelligence, and the many interfaces it provides."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox is scalable."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager could improve the integration docking, it should have more layers. For example, integration with OpenShift."
"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."
"Tech support staff can be more proactive."
"The current interface doesn't scale that well, and has some screens still in the old layout."
"It's hard to find competent resellers/support."
"Areas the product could be improved are in some of the reporting capabilities and how the reports are configured."
"When I was a component owner for PAM's Privileged Threat Analytics (PTA) component, what I wanted was a clear mapping to the MITRE ATT&CK framework, a framework which has a comprehensive list of use cases. We reached out to the vendor and asked them how much coverage they have of the uses cases found on MITRE, which would have given us a better view of things while I was the product owner. Unfortunately they did not have the capability of mapping onto MITRE's framework at that time."
"Our DevOps team is looking in the direction of cloud, because we are not in it today. We are hoping to build it with Conjur from the ground up."
"In the next release, I would like to see machine learning and anti-exploitation included."
"Not practical for real-time web traffic analysis because users won't wait for the FortiSandbox to complete its analysis before accessing content"
"In general, maybe they are not updated to cover risks."
"For additional features, maybe a form of execution pain files in a non-virtual environment because it has threats that identify when it is being run in a virtual machine."
"The response time from technical support should be improved."
"If you were to compare prices between vendors and manufacturers, you would see that the lowest equipment in the Sandbox line is quite expensive for a new customer."
"If we can have more dashboards, it would be good."
"The area I would like this solution to be improved in is the integrations for Sandbox with AI and big data ML mechanisms. I think this would be a practical improvement."
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 FortiSandbox is ranked 5th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 36 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.2. 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 FortiSandbox writes "Light and powerful solution design; useful to have". 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 FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Trellix Network Detection and Response, Check Point SandBlast Network, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and Fortinet FortiEDR. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Fortinet FortiSandbox 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.