We compared HashiCorp Vault and Azure Key Vault based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, HashiCorp Vault is praised for its superb security measures, ease of use, comprehensive functionality, and effective management of secrets and credentials. Azure Key Vault, on the other hand, is highlighted for its excellent security measures, seamless integration with other Azure services, and efficient key management capabilities. Users appreciate the pricing and setup cost of both products, with HashiCorp Vault offering flexibility in licensing options and Azure Key Vault providing transparent pricing structures. While both platforms have received positive feedback on customer service, HashiCorp Vault users have emphasized the prompt and helpful assistance received. In terms of ROI, users have reported significant benefits from both platforms, with HashiCorp Vault providing enhanced security, control over access privileges, improved compliance, and time-saving features, while Azure Key Vault offers secure storage, efficient access to keys and secrets, and increased productivity. Suggestions for improvement include enhancing the user interface, providing better documentation and examples, offering more seamless integration, and improving scalability and performance.
Features: HashiCorp Vault stands out for its comprehensive functionality and effective management of secrets and credentials in an encrypted manner. On the other hand, Azure Key Vault offers excellent security measures, seamless integration with Azure services, and efficient key management capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for HashiCorp Vault is minimal, making it easy to get started. Users appreciate the flexibility and options provided by the product's licensing. Azure Key Vault also offers a favorable experience in terms of setup cost, which is straightforward and easy to deploy. The licensing process is seamless, enabling efficient acquisition and management. Overall, both products have positive feedback on their setup cost and licensing., HashiCorp Vault has proven to offer significant ROI with enhanced security, control over access, compliance, efficiency, and seamless integration. Azure Key Vault offers secure storage, seamless integration, increased efficiency, robust security, convenience, and cost savings.
Room for Improvement: HashiCorp Vault would benefit from improvements in its user interface, documentation, integration capabilities, and scalability. On the other hand, Azure Key Vault needs enhancements in access management, user interface, and error handling, including better access permissions control and clearer error messages.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, both HashiCorp Vault and Azure Key Vault have varying durations for establishing a new tech solution. While some users reported separate timeframes for deployment and setup, others suggested that these phases refer to the same period., Users have expressed satisfaction with the prompt and helpful customer service provided by HashiCorp Vault. Azure Key Vault also offers effective and reliable customer support, with users appreciating the team's assistance and responsiveness.
The summary above is based on 31 interviews we conducted recently with HashiCorp Vault and Azure Key Vault users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It provides a secure and centralized location for managing and protecting sensitive information, making it an essential component for enhancing the security."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Key Vault are the security and convenience of changing passwords in multiple places."
"The solution uses the encryption technique to store the secret information data that uses EPCE. There is also one feature that monitors Azure Key Vault."
"Among the features that have helped improve our security posture are storing secrets in a secure location to create a trusted situation, trusted resources, and incorporating identity access management so that we know who has access to what."
"AI has been introduced to Azure."
"The most valuable feature is that you can retrieve user account details from the cloud."
"I would say it's granular controller who can access them."
"The product’s advantageous feature is integration."
"For me, the most valuable features include that it's easy to manage and maintain the password API for retrieving passwords and other things."
"The tool's dynamic rotation of the password credentials is good."
"The interface is very simple to navigate."
"It is user-friendly and easy to implement from any application point."
"The solution is stable. It has been working perfectly without any problem."
"The most valuable feature of HashiCorp Vault is the management of tickets in the pipeline."
"It's stable. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten."
"We use the solution for secret management."
"The solution needs to improve reliability and protection."
"Better integration with other third-party cloud providers, such as AWS and GCP, should be there. That's something I expect from a Microsoft-built product."
"While it is reliable, enhancing security and protection should always be the priority."
"There's room for improvement in cross-platform compatibility."
"Currently, our company has to add the secrets manually, one by one, in Azure Key Vault, which is a tedious process."
"They should improve its policies, which sometimes reapplied but don't sync properly between the Key vault and the role-based access. When I put some roles on the user side, it sometimes misses the end data to secure."
"I can see that other people are doing the infrastructure as code, they are able to easily manage and cycle their passwords as needed using their own interface they created. It would be nice if Microsoft provided more guidance in that area."
"The solution does not allow you to integrate with XML parties if it is not inside Azure itself."
"A drawback for some clients who have to be PCI compliant is that they still need to use and subscribe to an HSM (Hardware Security Module) solution."
"The technical support was hard to get a hold of and lacking in service."
"It would be helpful to have more advanced features."
"In my opinion, HashiCorp Vault could improve its user interface. Right now, they don't offer much in terms of a graphical interface, which means you usually have to manage things manually through API calls. I think CyberArk has a better approach because it provides a UI that integrates features across all its components, making it easier, especially for new users or those from organizations with strict licensing policies."
"I would rate the stability a six out of ten. There are some bugs and glitches. We are in touch with the vendor to resolve them."
"The solution could be much easier to implement."
"The solution's initial setup process is complicated."
"We could use more documentation, primarily to do with integrations."
Azure Key Vault is ranked 1st in Enterprise Password Managers with 46 reviews while HashiCorp Vault is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Password Managers with 16 reviews. Azure Key Vault is rated 8.6, while HashiCorp Vault is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Key Vault writes "Allows us to securely store our keys to prevent unauthorized access to unwanted users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HashiCorp Vault writes "Useful for machine-to-machine communication and has secret engine feature ". Azure Key Vault is most compared with AWS Secrets Manager, CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault, AWS Certificate Manager, Delinea Secret Server and 1Password, whereas HashiCorp Vault is most compared with AWS Secrets Manager, CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault, Delinea Secret Server, Keeper and BeyondTrust Password Safe. See our Azure Key Vault vs. HashiCorp Vault report.
See our list of best Enterprise Password Managers vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Password Managers 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.