We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and ForgeRock based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are able to centrally manage credentials, touch applications, and rotate passwords."
"The technical support for this solution is very good. If I was to rate it on a scale of one to five, I would give it a five."
"It has the ability to scale out. We have scaled out quite a bit with our product and use of it to get to multiple locations and businesses, so it has the breadth to do that."
"Increased our insight into how privileged accounts are being used and distributed within our footprint."
"It is a scalable product."
"I really like the PTA (Privileged Threat Analytics). I find this the best feature."
"The biggest feature is the security of the overall solution. It's very secure. The vaulting technology and the number of security layers involved in the vault, where privileged accounts are actually stored, is the heart of the solution."
"It enables companies to automate password management on target systems gaining a more secure access management approach."
"I like the way it is handling authentication and authorization."
"The most valuable features are that it is easy to manage and it's stable."
"ForgeRock has CIAM, which other products didn't have, and they have DevOps ready."
"I like the intelligent authentication feature."
"Installation and configuration are pretty easy for ForgeRock OpenIDM."
"ForgeRock products are customizable, and the out-of-the-box features are solid, too. I primarily use the OIDC compliance features. It's just a configuration. it's easy to set up and customize trees. We can add our own features if necessary. Banks and corporations have different standards and specific validations."
"We used it to implement multi-factor authentication and to improve our security posture as well as reducing the potential for attacks."
"The solution integrates well and it is important for them to keep up with the current trends in the market quickly enough, and they have been doing a good job at it."
"New functionalities and discovered bugs take longer to patch. We would greatly appreciate quicker development of security patches and bug corrections."
"Over the past seven years, I have seen a lot of ups and downs with the product."
"They can do a better job in the PSM space."
"This is probably a common thing, but they do ask for a lot of log files, a lot of information. They ask you to provide a lot of information to them before they're willing to give you anything at all upfront. It would be better if they were a little more give-and-take upfront: "Why don't you try these couple of things while we take your log files and stuff and go research them?" A little bit of that might be more helpful."
"It can be integrated with other systems, but it is not easy to integrate. It takes too long to integrate it. Its integration should be easier and simpler."
"The greatest area of improvement is with the user interface of the Password Vault Web Access component."
"The solution could improve by adding more connectors."
"The product could be easier to use. More work needs to be done on this aspect; it is not good enough yet. It also takes up a lot of server space. Sometimes we need to use up to seven servers."
"The solution could improve by adding more advertising and marketing."
"The product's support services in the French language are not free."
"The solution's deployment should be made easier."
"It should be a little bit easier to implement. It is user-friendly, but there is always scope for improvement."
"The solution requires more simplified customization. However, part of the problem is my clients determining their own preferences. Technology can help and do many things, but you have to define your own policies to ensure that the solution or service works within those parameters. Helping customers understand their business and different processes is another issue not relating to the functionality of this solution."
"As with any complex software platform, there is a learning curve to using ForgeRock, and it may require specialized expertise to implement and manage effectively."
"It should have a better user interface. Its flexibility should also be improved. It is not about simplifying; it is more about flexibility. Each company has its own requirements, and ForgeRock can provide more flexibility in terms of the use of existing modules to implement features for the customers."
"I think the upgrade process is sometimes a little complicated and there are failures that occur."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while ForgeRock is ranked 4th in Access Management with 27 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while ForgeRock is rated 8.0. 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 ForgeRock writes "Governance and access management solution used for multi-factor authentication that is outdated with an unresponsive UI". 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 ForgeRock is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, PingID, Microsoft Entra ID, Auth0 and Amazon Cognito. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. ForgeRock report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.