We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Palo Alto Networks WildFire 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."There are no issues with scalability. Our clients are very happy to use the product."
"We can make a policy that affects everybody instantly."
"The solution is stable."
"It has helped us with our adoption with other teams, and it has also helped us to integrate it at the ground level."
"If any intruder gets inside, they would not be able to move around nor do lateral movements. It minimize any attack problems within our network."
"Technical support has been very responsive in navigating challenges. It is very easy to open a ticket."
"PSM (Privilege Session Manager."
"The automatic rotation of credentials is probably the most useful feature."
"Remote access is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is how it keeps up-to-date with viruses."
"It is stable and pretty much scalable."
"Installing this product as a datacenter firewall for segregation and segmentation, and also configuring policies between zones has improved my organization."
"My primary use case for this solution is for a secure gateway."
"I give the initial setup an eight out of ten."
"The cloud-based services are a nice feature."
"It helps us when segmenting and securing the network and all sort of technologies, all sort of next generation needs. It's next generation phases of firewall like anti-virus, sandboxing, wifi, and VPN."
"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."
"It's hard to find competent resellers/support."
"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."
"Over the past seven years, I have seen a lot of ups and downs with the product."
"It's a big program. To scale excessively, locally, on an on-prem application, takes a lot of servers."
"Sometimes the infrastructure team is hesitant to provide more resources."
"CyberArk PAM could greatly benefit from an under-the-hood update; integrating machine learning algorithms could provide predictive insights."
"Some of the additional features that we are looking at are in the Conjur product. I am specifically discussing key management, API Keys, and things for connecting applications in the CI/CD pipelines."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"Other vendors have some sort of bandwidth management built into the firewall itself and Palo Alto is missing that."
"Any enhancements should likely be focused on the firewall appliance to further strengthen overall security capabilities, such as refining app and user identity features."
"I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power."
"The price could be better."
"Many years back an update caused an issue with the firewall. However, Palo Alto not only informed us of said issue, they also sent an update that fixed the issue before I even had time to log in to determine if the issue affected our services."
"I would give this product a rating of 9 out of 10 due to some slight issues of performance."
"The price of WildFire should be reduced in order to make it more affordable for our customers."
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 Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. 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 Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". 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 Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Proofpoint Email Protection and Juniper SRX Series Firewall. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire 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.