We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management and Sectona Privileged Access Management 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 video logs help us to identify any misuse of privileged accounts."
"The user interface, overall, is really good. If I have some 20 servers in my ID, I can easily see for which servers I have read-only access, for which servers I have prompt-access, and for which servers I have server admin access."
"The entire conversation that is happening between the servers and the client is recorded. It is a good feature if you want to do some analysis, and for investigation."
"One standout feature of ARCON is its ability to resolve lagging issues, especially noticeable in Linux environments."
"Previously, we had to go through some effort to change the credentials of our devices. The process was subject to human error... For things like managing credentials, some kind of register had to be maintained. With the Password Vault of ARCON, all these processes are automated. The credentials are changed, as per the schedule. The information is encrypted, kept in our vault, and sent to all the email addresses within the ARCON solution itself."
"Video and audio logs are there for any activities that the privileged admin carries out."
"It is recording video records for Windows and command-line reports for others, Linux and AIX, of whatever activities being carries by that particular administrator."
"It was very easy for us to move this application and database from on-premise to cloud, as well as configure new things, such as load balancing. The product is very compatible."
"A key factor for my company is support, and Sectona Privileged Access Management has good support. Another valuable feature of Sectona Privileged Access Management is that it's easy to onboard."
"The most valuable features of Sectona Privileged Access Management include robust session monitoring for privileged users."
"The most valuable feature is the risk management. When a Privileged user performs a certain command, such as running a script, the system highlights it in the risk management section as high, critical, or medium risk."
"It should be browser-agnostic and, frankly, it is working well on Internet Explorer. It should work on popular browsers like Mozilla and Firefox."
"Currently, we can manage only the SSH or RDP connections, but there are many more devices that are present, apart from our SSH and RDP. We want all this to be part of the ARCON solution. For the password management, they should increase the pool of supported devices, they should have more connectors."
"There are no APIs readily available... I'm working on automation for ARCON so that whatever the ARCON administrator is doing will be automated, rather than having to do it manually. For that, I had to spend months to get the API developed myself. Having that handy out of the box, that would really help..."
"The usability should be expanded to other browsers like Chrome and Firefox."
"We would like to see support for privileged accounts used in web-based systems like Blue Coat Secure Web Gateway, VMware ESXI management tools, etc."
"Bulk password automation is not available in ARCON when compared to other products."
"One thing which needs improvement is where it is keeping video logs of Windows Servers, whatever activities are being carried out by the administrator. Because Windows logs are a video, they are unsearchable, so if you need to search for a specific administrator and what he has done on a server, right now you need to go through different video logs of that particular timeframe. I think they are coming up with an additional feature where in it can be indexed and can be searchable."
"For the in-house built applications, they need to provide good, solid access through their portal."
"I would like to see future updates include robust support for cloud environments as organizations increasingly move towards cloud-based solutions."
"As I don't have at least one to two years of experience with Sectona Privileged Access Management, I cannot share areas for improvement in the solution. To me, Sectona Privileged Access Management has reasonable pricing, but it could still be improved. I'm also unsure if Sectona Privileged Access Management could cover the requirements of large-sized companies, but for small-sized to medium-sized companies, I'd recommend the solution."
"Sectona needs to think about SaaS solutions and cloud use cases. For example, we need to be able to integrate Sectona PAM with next-generation applications such as Docker and Lambda, as well as ITD pipelines that use privileged user data."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sectona Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management is ranked 8th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 32 reviews while Sectona Privileged Access Management is ranked 17th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 3 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8, while Sectona Privileged Access Management is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management writes "Offers good session monitoring and recording features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sectona Privileged Access Management writes "Effective risk management, feature of recording all privileged user activities in a compressed format but limited SaaS capability". ARCON Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, ManageEngine PAM360 and Symantec Privileged Access Manager, whereas Sectona Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. See our ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. Sectona Privileged Access Management 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.
