We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiClient 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."We like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"The technical support is good."
"It's secure and reliable. I especially appreciate that it's locked down and only allows access to authorized components."
"Right off the bat, the most valuable feature is the DNA scan. It gives us the ability to scan our environment and find the accounts that we're going to need to take under control."
"It improves security in our company. We have more than 10,000 accounts that we manage in CyberArk. We use these accounts for SQLs, Windows Server, and Unix. Therefore, keeping these passwords up-to-date in another solution or software would be impossible. Now, we have some sort of a platform to manage passwords, distribute the inflow, and manage IT teams as well as making regular changes to it according to the internal security policies in our bank."
"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."
"We can make a policy that affects everybody instantly."
"What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users."
"FortiClient is very easy, useful, and practical."
"The connection speed is fast. I can connect quickly at any time, and there are never any interruptions to the FortiClient connection. I could easily code into the client's server with that connection, with no lag."
"It’s really easy to use."
"The VPN connection is the feature that I like the most."
"It is not at all interesting for me as a standalone product, but as a product that is integrated with FortiGate with all features, it is actually a great tool and a great experience. I had test installed FortiClient working from home. I remembered and knew which web categories were denied or allowed. All those policies were correctly reflected standalone, for example, on my laptop."
"I find it very easy to configure and also very stable."
"From an application perspective, this solution is stable."
"Remote connectivity is its most valuable feature."
"The initial setup was somewhat complex."
"Online help needs to be looked into with live agent support."
"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."
"If we could have some kind of out-of-the box feature that you can simply say "no" so they don't have to go into a development mode, that would a really helpful feature."
"It needs better documentation with more examples for the configuration files and API/REST integration"
"It is easily customized, and that customization makes it very easy to start trying to shoehorn the solution into roles it was never intended to fill."
"The initial setup has room for improvement to be more straightforward."
"The continuous scanning of the assets is limited to Windows and Unix. We like to have the solution scan any databases, network devices, and security devices for privileged accounts. That would be very helpful."
"As far as I can tell, the solution only has one single function, so they could expand its functionality."
"The user interface could be more inviting."
"Sometimes there are issues when we are trying to connect."
"The only thing that is lacking in this product is the support. Their support can be improved."
"The features of Fortinet FortiClient could be improved."
"The software inventory part is not yet up-to-date. It doesn't have a great interface, which is a disadvantage. I wish we could leverage it, but we don't use it at all because it's not that reliable."
"I have yet to find the benefits of the latest upgraded version."
"An area of improvement could be better integration with the active directory. I did not find it easy to configure."
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 Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 85 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiClient 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 Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". 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 FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Fortinet FortiClient 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.