We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."The implementation is quite easy because the documents are always online."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"Reduces major vulnerabilities by removing local administrator privileges."
"Scalability is good. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"The privileged access and the application control are helpful in making sure we have good, robust challenge responses. Blacklisting with trusted application protection is also beneficial for us."
"Logs that get collected on the Privilege Management console from the agents are very good. They help us to identify the aspects from which we have to whitelist an application."
"The tool is easy to use and deploy. It has PAM capabilities like privilege access. The solution helps with the management of third parties and vendors. It is an effective solution compared to other alternatives."
"Technical support is good."
"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."
"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."
"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."
"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."
"Their technical support could be more responsive and helpful."
"Reporting analytics is one of the areas that can be improved. It is a new cloud-based solution. So, many more specific reports can come out natively. Currently, we get all the events, and we put them in plug-ins. From there, we generate our own design of reports. If there is a much more solid or robust reporting analytics framework within the product itself, it would be helpful."
"Reports to the end user."
"We use a program to automate all of this, but it's not a default feature of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management."
"The weaknesses are related to the effort required to migrate from existing technologies or having no Privilege Access Management (PAM) at all to adopting technologies like BeyondTrust. It involves changes in processes and can take a significant amount of time, typically six to twelve months."
"There is room for improvement in having the solution align more with standards. We're always shoehorning the product into the standards. It's not that it doesn't work for standards, it does. But Quick Start Policies are pretty close to what we need. The vendor needs to keep looking at GDPR, 27001, and 27701. That's why our clients buy the product."
"A valuable enhancement could be the capability to deploy agents directly through the console."
"What's bothering me, which is true of all of them, is that sometimes, the error codes that come up don't necessarily get reflected in the searches within their support sites or they're out of date. I would rather search by an error code than type in the text and search for it by text because the error code means that it is programmatic, and it is known. It might not be desired, but it at least is not unexpected. If you don't have an error code, you just get an anomalous error, and if it is lengthy, it can be difficult to search and find the specific instance you're looking for. This is something I would like all of them to improve. BeyondTrust, CyberArk, Centrify, and Thycotic could do some improvements in staying up to date and actually allowing you to search based on the product version. They are assuming that everybody is on their way to release. They put out a new release, but it is not reflected on the support site, which makes no sense to me, especially when they revamp all the error codes. They all have been guilty of this in some way."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."
"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 4th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 27 reviews while Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway is ranked 19th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 4 reviews. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management writes "Admin rights can be granted and revoked within minutes and that is what everything comes down to, for us". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway writes "Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues". BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is most compared with CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server and ARCON Privileged Access Management, whereas Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Talon, Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler Internet Access, CrowdStrike Falcon and SentinelOne Singularity Complete.
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.
