We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, NETSCOUT, Akamai and others in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection."The stateless device format means that the box is very strong for preventing DDoS attacks."
"We have taken on the Arbor Cloud subscription, which is really useful because you secure yourself for anything beyond your current mitigation capacity. This is a really good feature of Arbor that is available."
"It's just one dashboard with mitigation. You decide which mitigation you want and at what threshold to do this or that. Its operation is pretty simple. It's easy."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"The solution provides good protection against volumetric DDoS attacks."
"With real-time packet capture features, you can easily and quickly response."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Reporting is quite good. There are several pages of reporting on DDoS attacks, and you can find all the details that you need."
"The most valuable feature of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is privileged threat analytics."
"It provides an accountability to the individuals who are using it, knowing that it is audited and tracked."
"PSM (Privilege Session Manager."
"On the EBB user side, we were able to secure all the server root passwords and admin for Windows. This was a big win for us."
"The key aspects of privileged access management are being able rotate passwords, make sure someone is accountable, and tie it back to a user (when the system is being used)."
"It helps our customers in their software requirement imports."
"It is a single tool that isolates possible kinds of malware. You get lateral movement blocking and auditing information, e.g., you know who is doing what. You are getting protections from the service as well as a useful environment. All your admins can easily go in and out of your company while accessing your servers in a secure way, even if they are working abroad."
"I appreciate the ease of use for support analysts."
"On the application layer, they could have a better distributed traffic flow. They could improve that a bit. For network data it is very effective, but the application layer can be improved."
"An issue which needs to be addressed concerns information I received of attacks on the radar and Arbor, allegedly, not taking any action."
"If we want to see live traffic, we can see do so. But once an attack that lasts for five minutes is done, the data is no longer there. It would be an improvement if we could see recent traffic in the dashboard. We can check and download live traffic, but a past attack, with all the details, such as why it happened and how to mitigate and prevent such future attacks, would be helpful to see."
"I would also like more visibility into their bad actor feeds, their fingerprint feeds. We try to be good stewards of the internet, so if there are attacks, or bad actors within our networks, if there were an easier way for us to find them, we could stop them from doing their malicious activity, and at the same time save money."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"The implementation should be made easier."
"Sometimes it blocks legitimate traffic. If a legitimate user is trying to access the server continuously, the product suspects that this is a DoS traffic file. That is a case where it needs to improve. It needs machine-learning."
"A small improvement could be a better reporting system."
"Many of the infrastructure folks who use the product dislike it because it complicates their workflow. They get a little less control, and they have to go through a specific solution. It proactively logs in for them, which obfuscates some of the issues that they may be troubleshooting."
"There is a lot of room for improvement in the report section. I also work on other tools, such as Thycotic, which allows you to create customized reports for your organization's needs. In CyberArk, there are limited reports, whereas in Thycotic or some of the other PAM tools, because the database is different, you can customize the report based on your needs through SQL queries."
"They can do a better job in the PSM space."
"New functionalities and discovered bugs take longer to patch. We would greatly appreciate quicker development of security patches and bug corrections."
"It needs better documentation with more examples for the configuration files and API/REST integration"
"There is a learning curve when it comes to planning out the deployment strategy, but once it is defined, it runs itself."
"The issue of technical support is crucial, as there are not many specialized partners available in Brazil to provide this service. While English language support is of good quality, there is a significant shortage of partners capable of meeting the demand locally."
"Make it easier to deploy."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, 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". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas 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.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.