We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and WSO2 Identity Server 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."Enterprise Password Vault, Privilege Session Manager, and Application Identity Management have been very useful for our client environment."
"AIM has been a great help in automating password retrieval which removes the need for hard-coded credentials."
"This is a complete solution that can detect cyber attacks well."
"The combination of CPM and PSM resolves a lot of use cases."
"Its' quite stable."
"The solution helps our developers access internal systems. It also helps us in Privilege Access Management."
"All the features of CyberArk are useful for me, but the biggest one is that CyberArk has logs for all the features. That is important when there is a problem. You know where to look and you have the information. In cyber security, the most important aspect is information."
"The solution is stable."
"Some of the valuable features of the solution are the easy integration with processes, such as Single Sign-On. Overall WSO2 is straightforward and does not need customization."
"The keystore feature has been most valuable for us."
"The single sign-on procedure itself, as well as the ability to connect to external user sources such as Microsoft Active Directory and LDAP servers, are the solution's most valuable features."
"It's very easy to implement everything."
"I would rate the solution's stability eight or nine out of ten."
"Comprehensive ecosystem."
"The product provides easy integration between API manager and IT server components."
"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."
"Stability is a huge concern right now. We are on a version which is very unstable. We have to upgrade to stabilize it. It is fine, but the problem is we have to hire CyberArk to do the upgrade. This costs money, and it is their bug."
"The initial setup was somewhat complex."
"One thing that could be improved is to create of a better alternative for fixing group policy fees. We currently use Microsoft, but they have introduced new policies that may not be compatible."
"What could be improved in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the licensing model. It should be more flexible in terms of the users. Currently, it's based on the number of users, but many users only log in once in four months or once in five months. It would be great if the licensing model could be modified based on user needs. We even have users who have not logged in even once."
"Sometimes the infrastructure team is hesitant to provide more resources."
"I would love them to improve their UI customizing features."
"Our DevOps team is looking in the direction of cloud, because we are not in it today. We are hoping to build it with Conjur from the ground up."
"Sometimes working with the code is difficult because I search for documentation about the code and how to work with the code, which is where I believe they should improve, by providing some documentation on how to work with the code."
"The high availability architecture has to be improved."
"This solution requires extensive knowledge to be used effectively as certain areas of its use are not user friendly."
"There needs to be a good support model and easy-to-understand documentation."
"The solution could improve its development from a user perspective."
"This solution does not have BPM workflows already integrated, we had to integrate the BPM module externally. They do not provide full-featured auditing and certification modules out of the box."
"I found the initial setup to be very complex."
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 WSO2 Identity Server is ranked 6th in Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) with 7 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while WSO2 Identity Server 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 WSO2 Identity Server writes "Provides valuable API management features, but its technical documentation needs 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 WSO2 Identity Server is most compared with Auth0, Amazon Cognito, SAP Identity Management, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and SailPoint IdentityIQ. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. WSO2 Identity Server 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.
