We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and IBM Security Secret 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."The established sessions on the target systems are fully isolated and the privileged account credentials are never exposed to the end-users or their client applications and devices."
"CyberArk has been easy for us to implement and the adoption has been good. We've been able to standardize a bunch of things. We've been able to standardize relatively easily with the use of the platforms and managing the policies."
"AIM has been a great help in automating password retrieval which removes the need for hard-coded credentials."
"It enables us to secure accounts and make sure they are compliant."
"It has the ability to scale out. We have scaled out quite a bit with our product and use of it to get to multiple locations and businesses, so it has the breadth to do that."
"The solution is stable."
"We like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"It enables companies to automate password management on target systems gaining a more secure access management approach."
"What I like best about IBM Security Secret Server is its single-access console. It's also easy to manage and fulfills the requirements with the least resistance."
"Stability-wise, I think it is a very good solution."
"One of the most valuable features is scalability, and how it allows you to scale it without affecting the underlying core components."
"As a PAM solution, Secret Server performs all the use cases in our environment."
"The live recording is a very useful feature."
"This product needs professional consulting services to onboard accounts effectively based user profiles."
"One of our current issues is a publishing issue. If we whitelist Google Chrome, all the events of Google Chrome should be gone. It is not happening."
"We would, of course, always prefer it if the pricing was cheaper."
"When something comes out, it's generally airtight and works as advertised. However, sometimes they are a little bit slow to keep up with what's coming out. In 2017, for example, they released support for Windows Server 2016, which had been out for a year or so."
"We need a bit more education for our user community because they are not using it to its capabilities."
"The one place where we found that this product really needs to improve is the cloud. Simple integrations don't exist, even today. We don't have anything specific on CyberArk for managing, SaaS products, SaaS vendors, SaaS credentials. I understand it's a vendor-based thing and that they have to coordinate with the other vendors to be able to do that, and there are integrations coming. But these are the major places where CyberArk definitely needs to invest some more time."
"The current interface is not very intuitive."
"There were a lot of manual steps in the initial setup which could have been automated. I read the 10.4 release that was sent out about a month or two ago, and I saw the steps required for upgrade have been reduced by about 90%. That was a big thing for me, but I still haven't seen that yet because we have not upgrade past 9.9.5."
"It would be preferable if the full proxy was included in the IBM Security Secret Server."
"Secret Server should have the ability to discover privileged accounts in the servers, like the administrator or users, from SQL and Oracle without having to import a script."
"The newer interface is more difficult to use than the previous one, and consequently, new users might need more training."
"What needs improvement in IBM Security Secret Server is support. The local partner provides good support, but IBM itself doesn't. Most of the time, the IBM support team does not aggressively resolve issues reported through chat or the IBM website."
"The nonclustered index is working in an area with a problem that needs improvement."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while IBM Security Secret Server is ranked 13th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 7 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while IBM Security Secret Server is rated 8.2. 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 IBM Security Secret Server writes "User-friendly, granular features, and is simple to implement, but the technical support could be improved". 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 IBM Security Secret Server is most compared with Delinea Secret Server and Delinea Privileged Access Service. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. IBM Security Secret Server report.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
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.