We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."I find the solution’s features like section management, password management, and analytics valuable."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"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 most valuable feature is the asset discovery, which makes it very easy to locate and identify assets and pull them into the manager."
"Scalability is good. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"The notable aspect is its ability to capture the application's behavior comprehensively and this thorough analysis is crucial for effective policy management."
"It is straightforward. It is a good technology, and it is made to do one single thing."
"BeyondTrust has very good integrations with quite a lot of security vendors such as SailPoint, IBM, FortiGuard, Splunk, etc."
"The most valuable feature is the security, in particular, the One Time Password support."
"The data collection is excellent and easy to do. It does not require a lot of configuration nor does it require rules to be written like other competitors do."
"With the tool in place, you need to hire fewer people to provide access, and you have control over your processes."
"Roles, connectors for provisioning and re-accreditation or reviews help greatly to govern user access."
"RSA Identity Governance and lifecycles are good for the access certification and auditing sections."
"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the error codes that come up don't necessarily get reflected in the searches within their support sites or they're out of date.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."
"They need to come up with better integrative options which should be customer-centric."
"How the accounts are presented in the solution's UI can be improved."
"The program updates are very rare and the frequency is too far apart to take care of bug fixes and adding the latest features."
"A valuable enhancement could be the capability to deploy agents directly through the console."
"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."
"The product should improve its price."
"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."
"Technical support in Pakistan can be improved."
"Every connector that you have in the product needs to be custom-built, so there are not a lot of standard connectors available in the product, because of which there are a lot of hidden consultancy costs."
"There are scalability issues. This product does not scale very well. It is not a good product for load balancing / active–active architecture."
"If you use the appliance version then it won't handle a huge database volume."
"RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle could improve out-of-the-box customization."
"The user interface and workflow need improvement, and more connectors would help."
"This product is missing a lot of features which other competitors are providing. One of the key features that are missing right now is risk scoring. Additionally, there is not much scope for customization - everything is hard-coded and predefined, so it does not allow the developers to make many modifications."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 4th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 27 reviews while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is ranked 22nd in Identity Management (IM) with 9 reviews. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is rated 6.8. 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 RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle writes "Lacking customization, poor support, but useful auditing". 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 RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Saviynt, One Identity Manager, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine).
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.
