We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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."I like the integrations for external applications."
"The voice technology is very good."
"Central Password Manager is useful for agentless automated password management through AD integration as well as endpoints for different devices."
"We can make a policy that affects everybody instantly."
"The central password manager is the most valuable feature because the password is constantly changing. If an outsider threat came in and gained access to one of those passwords, they would not have access for long."
"Technical support has been very responsive in navigating challenges. It is very easy to open a ticket."
"What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users."
"CyberArk is a very stable product and it's a stable product because it has a simple design and a simple architecture that allows you to leverage the economies of scale across the base of your infrastructure that you already have implemented. It doesn't really introduce any new complex pieces of infrastructure that would make it that much more difficult to scale."
"We know we can scale up with what we have, and we probably will not need to buy any further appliances down the road."
"CA PAM is working well for us."
"The interface is very friendly, colorful, and bold."
"We can check the activities in the server for fragile files and documents in case of any issues."
"It is great for identity governance."
"We found that the architecture is scalable and very resilient."
"We can enforce complicated password policies and very important frequent password changes."
"Password Management and Session Recording. The simplicity and ease that it is to be up and running out-of-the-box is very much appreciated."
"The major pain point that we have is the capacity of CyberArk due to the sheer volume of NPAs that we are managing. We are a large organization and we have hundreds of thousands of non-personal accounts to manage. We have already found out that there are certain capacity limitations within CyberArk that might introduce performance issues. From my perspective, something that would be valuable would be if the vault could hold more passwords and be more scalable."
"The current user interface is a little dated. However, I hear there are changes coming in the next version."
"The greatest area of improvement is with the user interface of the Password Vault Web Access component."
"The continuous scanning of the assets is limited to Windows and Unix. We like to have the solution scan any databases, network devices, and security devices for privileged accounts. That would be very helpful."
"I would like to see better automation in granting access, better tools, more efficient tools, to be able to customize the solution that CyberArk provides."
"We need a bit more education for our user community because they are not using it to its capabilities."
"The usual workload is sometimes delayed by the solution."
"Areas the product could be improved are in some of the reporting capabilities and how the reports are configured."
"We have to do a lot of manual work to automate features."
"Bring more technology into the portfolio and being able to collapse those products into a much more integrated way."
"Instead of just giving passwords to the user based on job function, from auditing perspective, turn that cycle around. That would really help from an auditing standpoint."
"An improvement for this solution is that it should not be constantly based on user name and password. There should be a condition to edit and update your username."
"They need to have zero tier and active-active setup with zero minimum downtime, which they are working on it. "
"They need to do a little bit more on the mainframe side."
"We experience stability issues after every patch upgrade. This is a place where CA needs to improve drastically."
"The management console could be improved."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is ranked 18th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 50 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.8. 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 Symantec Privileged Access Manager writes "Allows IT and consultants to access the infrastructure environment but needs more security and better support". 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 Symantec Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, Delinea Secret Server, ARCON Privileged Access Management and VMware Identity Manager. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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.
