We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Remote Access solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its security, simplicity, and ease of deployment and maintenance are the most valuable. It is FIPS compliant, so it goes through severe penetration testing every one year or two years. They have to maintain this compliance. It is very safe. Customers have been using it in the last eight years because of the simplicity of getting it deployed quickly. Most of the people using the solution had been hacked already, so they needed it quickly. As compared to the other solutions in the market, it can be turned on in production very quickly. You don't really need to have a server. It can be deployed very rapidly on VMware or Hyper-V, and you don't need to do an installation. It is a kind of an all-included package that you just deploy in a VM environment. It is basically a VM that is specifically built for a customer. The way the PRA data solutions work is that you need to build them for each customer because of being hard-coded with their SSL certificate, their web page name, and all that."
"The privileged remote access platform is able to track and record everything that happens within a session."
"The scalability is excellent."
"Its initial setup process is straightforward."
"The visibility of the solution's Vault works as it is supposed to: out-of-the-box for domain accounts, endpoints, and local accounts associated with discovery jobs."
"One of the features that I really like about it is the ability to set a start date, time, and end date for the access. For example, you can set the access for a person from tomorrow, Monday, or Tuesday and ending on a specific period of the day or a specific date. That's really quite helpful."
"I like the enterprise credential manager. It's a connector that sits in PRA and tests the credentials for the end user with a process that will clean the password. This is one of PRA's primary features and simplifies user onboarding. There aren't many restrictions or complications. We can add the user while only opening one port, which is more than enough to access the PRA server. Every organization requires only four critical servers out of a hundred and some 50 production servers."
"It is a real fortress. Its security is very strong. Multi-factor came as a feature out-of-the-box, which was big for us. That helps us meet another compliance requirement. It enforces encryption. Nobody can see what we are doing in our remote system if they happen to be listening for unencrypted traffic. That is its biggest strength."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"The portal access was very good."
"In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work."
"Stickiness is the most valuable feature of the product."
"We have seen a return on investment from F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager. It provided access at a time when we didn't have it."
"Our customers have never complained about the stability"
"The load balancing features are valuable."
"This is a product that is easy to install and integrate, and it is simple to use."
"Its management is through two different portals, and you can't get from one portal to the other. I have to literally open up another website and go into it a different way. There are no inner links between the two. They should interlink the actual virtual server and the appliance. In general, there should be one interface for management for admins."
"One of our gaps or pain points is having multi-factor authentication at the endpoint and using the PRA password injection from BeyondTrust, which does not work in our environment. We can only have MFA at the login of BeyondTrust to check out the password. Therefore, we can't meet our security requirements of having it on the endpoint."
"Some of the capabilities in the solution were not as available or not as outstanding as CyberArk. We had to manage whatever little was available for us, especially its recording capabilities, logs, and a number of things."
"Changing your password should be simplified, and there should not be a charge for it."
"They could probably integrate a wizard or something like that to add a new use case. It could be something that makes it easier to add a new use case."
"The integration client, backup solution, and SSO setup and provisioning could be improved. There isn't any documented or supported user provisioning currently, which slows down the processes of onboarding and assigning permissions. I would like to see this improved soon."
"There is no connectivity to the appliance side. There is no API, and it is just difficult for me to capture what version the device is on without going in and doing screenshots. It is a little too secure in that regard, where they don't even trust their product owner. Since a lot of hacks come from the inside, they are probably doing what they need to do out of necessity. It is just that I have to work pretty hard to produce compliance data on the box."
"When doing protocol panel jumps, the tool does not restrict what is recorded on the user's computer."
"In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side."
"I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal."
"The solution is quite costly."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"The technical support’s response time must be improved."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"We do not have knowledgeable support teams locally."
"Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control."
More BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access is ranked 6th in Remote Access with 21 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is ranked 10th in Remote Access with 13 reviews. BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access is rated 8.6, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access writes "Our support team can do so much more without having to actively engage our customers, which saves us time and money". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) writes " Facilitates packet inspection, modification, and offloading and offers visibility and troubleshooting capabilities, allowing for pre-production server testing". BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Citrix DaaS (formerly Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service), WALLIX Bastion, BeyondTrust Remote Support and Appgate SDP, whereas F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is most compared with Citrix Gateway, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ivanti Connect Secure and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine). See our BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access vs. F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) report.
See our list of best Remote Access vendors.
We monitor all Remote Access 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.
