We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] 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 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."
"The privileged access management into sensitive systems is very valuable. That includes control from the endpoint all the way through to the managing of passwords and credentials that are used by the person to access the sensitive information. It's very useful, because nobody ever really maintains passwords for those endpoint systems. It's maintained in the Dropbox password file."
"The solution's least privilege enforcement has helped us ensure access is given to only the required people."
"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."
"It is straightforward. It is a good technology, and it is made to do one single thing."
"Scalability is good. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"I find the comprehensive Privilege Access Management features valuable, including automation, and the ability to integrate with applications and the Windows operating system."
"It has some features that other products don't have yet, differentiation that sets it apart in the marketplace... Those features are a centralized dashboard and the ability to issue and revoke entitlements within minutes. That makes a difference."
"The most valuable feature in Centrify is the ability to authenticate in a Linux environment, because this is what my customers were looking for. They are coming from a Linux environment, so they appreciate the identity and access management for allowing Linux workloads to authenticate securely."
"They need to come up with better integrative options which should be customer-centric."
"It only has limited support for Mac."
"It keeps on breaking every now and then. It is not yet mature. Every time something new comes up or we run into some new issues, the culprit is BeyondTrust because the agents and the adapter are not mature. The new development process goes on, and they're not able to handle things. It should be mature. It shouldn't break every now and then."
"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 deployment process should be clarified or made simpler. It would be helpful if the solution had in-app tutorials for users to look at as they progress through the system. Sometimes we get lost and need to go back to check what exactly the function was. There should be small hints around major key functions. It would go a long way in speeding up the deployment process."
"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."
"The program updates are very rare and the frequency is too far apart to take care of bug fixes and adding the latest features."
"The help system should be improved to provide a quick help guide with each tab within the solution, which explains what each particular function does."
"What can be improved in Centrify is the integration between the on-premise environment, specifically for Linux environments with the cloud infrastructure, such as Microsoft as it was during my time as a solution architect."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 5th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 27 reviews while Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Privileged Access Management (PAM). BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] is rated 7.0. 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 Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] writes "Has system multi-factor authentication abilities but is lacking connection between on-premise and cloud-based solutions". 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 Centrify Endpoint Services [EOL] is most compared with .
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.