We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and NetWitness Platform 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."Automates password management to remove the human chain weakness."
"You can easily manage more than 4000 accounts with one PSM."
"There are no issues with scalability. Our clients are very happy to use the product."
"CyberArk has allowed us to get the credentials and passwords out of hard-coded property files."
"The password management feature is valuable."
"It supports lots of requirements in the privileged access management area."
"Increased our insight into how privileged accounts are being used and distributed within our footprint."
"You can write different types of policies for custom business needs or any developer needs. If they need certain functions allocated, they can be customized easily."
"The product has a user-friendly interface and a valuable feature for threat intelligence integration."
"The most valuable features are the threat prediction and network forensics."
"Their technical support responds quickly and are knowledgable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to write rules and triggers for network communication, and then being able to investigate based on that."
"It's fully scalable. There is no limit. Of course, the license limits per day the number of terabytes. In my opinion, it's very flexible."
"The most valuable features are the packet inspection and the automated incident response."
"The most valuable features are the packet decoder, log decoder, and concentrator."
"Performance and reporting are very good."
"The admin interface of the Password Vault Web Access (PVWA) is moving from an old style (the classic interface) to a new style (the v10 interface) and unfortunately, this process is quite slow."
"I would like to see better usability for non-technical people."
"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."
"We had an issue with the Copy feature... Apparently, in version 10, that Copy feature does not work. You actually have to click Show and then copy the password from within Show and then paste it. We've had a million tickets and we had to figure out a workaround to it."
"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."
"We don't often contact technical support, but when we do it, the response could be faster and better."
"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."
"Integration with the ticketing system should allow any number of fields to be used for validation before allowing a user to be evaluated and able to access a server."
"The documentation is not as structured as I would like, personally, and I think that it can be improved and made much more user-friendly."
"The solution should have more integration capabilities with different platforms."
"Lots of competing products have vulnerability protection built into their products, and this solution would be improved by including that support."
"The system looks like it is a mix of a bunch of different systems, and nothing looked like it was quite together."
"RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets can improve the threat level aspect, it is lacking compared to other solutions. Whenever any hacking activity or any other threat factor occurred they used to provide the coverages very fast when comparing RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets. I heard the other three solutions, from a discussion with my team members who had experience in other solutions, they used to say that. Whenever any issues happened across the globe RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets are a little bit slow improving those detection mechanisms."
"We have encountered issues with unresolved crashes."
"The product's licensing models are complex to understand. This particular area needs improvement."
"Its technical support could be better."
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 NetWitness Platform is ranked 20th in Log Management with 36 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. 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 NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". 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 NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel and Cisco Secure Network Analytics. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. NetWitness Platform 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.