We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Securonix Next-Gen SIEM 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."It enables us to secure accounts and make sure they are compliant."
"Its' quite stable."
"It helps our customers in their software requirement imports."
"The product is for hardening access and making the organization more secure, therefore reducing chances of a breach."
"The solution is stable."
"I really like the PTA (Privileged Threat Analytics). I find this the best feature."
"It allows users to self-provision access to the accounts that they need."
"AIM has been a great help in automating password retrieval which removes the need for hard-coded credentials."
"The solution has proven to be stable so far...The solution is easy to scale up."
"The most valuable feature is what Securonix calls enrichment. Securonix is very powerful because of all the data it can process and automatically enrich. The actionable intelligence it provides is one of its benefits, due to the processing capacity it has."
"We can customize our use cases with the tools provided by Securonix. It is an excellent tool that can ingest data in different ways and is very flexible."
"One of the most valuable features is the integration of all types of data sources to extract relevant information regarding events. It is a good solution when it comes to the correlations that it makes within all the data handled in our company."
"The UEBA functionality indicates a lot about behaviors that are not found through a traditional SIEM. We have exploited that more than anything since we started using it."
"The user interface is easy to learn and navigate."
"Risk scoring was nice. We could exactly see which user had the highest risk score, and then we could pick it up and work on it."
"Its console is very easy to use and configure. It is very intuitive for our use cases. App integrations are also pretty nice."
"We don't often contact technical support, but when we do it, the response could be faster and better."
"The scalability, sometimes, is lacking. It works really well for more static environments... But for an environment where you're constantly spinning up new infrastructure or new endpoints, sometimes it has a hard time keeping up."
"Some aspects of the administration need improvement, though they have recently made improvements to the API. However, the management with the interface and configuration are not so user-friendly. It has not changed much during all the years that CyberArk has been on the market. The management part, like platform management as well as PSM connectors definition and management, could be improved, even if it has already been done with the API."
"The current user interface is a little dated. However, I hear there are changes coming in the next version."
"The solution should be able to mitigate internal threats"
"The usual workload is sometimes delayed by the solution."
"Having a centralized place to manage the solution has been something that I have always wanted, and they are starting to understand that and bring things back together."
"We need a bit more education for our user community because they are not using it to its capabilities."
"Other than issues with the training, there have been issues with the encryption. There have also been issues with some of the reporting, minor glitches that they have fixed as they've gone along."
"The incident response area should be improved."
"The pricing. I'm not sure how they are proceeding with the identity based pricing compared with DB pricing which most of the vendors are using today."
"Sometimes, the injectors lag and are not loading. It would be nice if that could be improved."
"We thought they were going to be a great product, however, they're actually not great at all as an MSP."
"There is room for improvement in the product's integration with ServiceNow and in the reporting features."
"Securonix implements risk scores based on different policies that are triggered. We've seen some challenges with the risk scores and how they trigger. These are things that Securonix has recognized and they've been working with us to help improve things."
"We have compliance needs. We have investigation needs. And we have situations where an analyst needs to look at threats. These three things require a different view of how they look at the threats. What would be good is to have Securonix create three different views of their Security Command Center so that, depending on the persona of the person logging in, they'd get the relevant data they need and not see everything."
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 Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 7th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 27 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM 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 Securonix Next-Gen SIEM writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". 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 Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM and Rapid7 InsightIDR. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM 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.