We performed a comparison between One Identity Safeguard 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."The extensible framework for authentication is one of the most valuable features. We use an MFA plug-in and a lot of different factors, depending on what the business use-cases are. And of course, the auditing functionality is also valuable."
"The customer service and technical support are very good."
"It is easy to manage. There is a very logical, clear user interface. Also, the integration of scripts is thoughtfully implemented. Overall, it's a nice product to manage."
"One of the most important things is that it is very easy to use and install. It is also agentless, so all of the operations happen more smoothly than any other product."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"All sessions are audited and they are indexed/searchable through the GUI."
"We don't need to use VPN for remote access."
"The transparent mode for privileged sessions is one of the best things for customers, because they don't see the system in-between."
"The key benefits are we improve our governance. We ensure we can build more trust in the way we run and operate our environment, and most of all is the accountability."
"We know we can scale up with what we have, and we probably will not need to buy any further appliances down the road."
"It is great for identity governance."
"It gives you list of servers, so you can see which users have access to which servers. This is really useful, so we can make sure nobody is getting extra access than what is needed."
"Comprehensive coverage of the required features for the PAM solution."
"One of the key things for us about the product is around its simplicity. Being able to put in the technology that allows the business to remove complexity and also allow the security improvements."
"Stability is solid as a rock."
"For me, it is the robust API which is the most valuable feature. This allows for low maintenance costs and allows applications to automatically connect. This is great to automate security of the DevOps pipeline for shared secrets across environments. Also, being on Linux and a virtual appliance is great."
"We would like to have the option of importing assets by using the CSV file. It was available in the earlier versions, but it is not available now."
"On a scale of one to ten, the stability is an eight."
"We would like to be able to generate certificate signing requests (CSRs) from the interface for certificates."
"The main point regarding the user experience is that Safeguard has two separate management consoles."
"It needs more marketing."
"There is a lack of documentation and many problems with the plugins."
"We have feature requests and would like to see the turnaround times on those features to be faster."
"Some of the out-of-the-box reporting isn't that rich. We spoke to our Safeguard reps who have acknowledged that some of the reporting features can certainly be improved and that we're not the only customer who has cited this. There are very little out-of-the-box reporting capabilities. You have to build the queries and the report. I believe in the next release they're going to be addressing this."
"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."
"I’m no fan of Java as an application front-end, as it tends to have issues depending on what browser one’s using."
"They should include some assignments in the test environment to explore the product's features."
"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."
"We experience stability issues after every patch upgrade. This is a place where CA needs to improve drastically."
"The setup is complex."
"They need to have zero tier and active-active setup with zero minimum downtime, which they are working on it. "
"The management console could be improved."
More Symantec Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
One Identity Safeguard is ranked 4th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 39 reviews while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is ranked 18th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 50 reviews. One Identity Safeguard is rated 8.2, while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of One Identity Safeguard writes "Provides us with centralized storage of secrets and credentials, and visibility into the use of privileged access". 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". One Identity Safeguard is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, WALLIX Bastion, Delinea Secret Server, BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access and Fudo PAM, whereas Symantec Privileged Access Manager is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, ARCON Privileged Access Management and Delinea Secret Server. See our One Identity Safeguard 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.
