Compare CA Privileged Access Manager vs. CyberArk PAS

CA Privileged Access Manager is ranked 3rd in Privileged Access Management with 8 reviews while CyberArk PAS is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management with 53 reviews. CA Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.8, while CyberArk PAS is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of CA Privileged Access Manager writes "It will provide us with more security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CyberArk PAS writes "Gives us the security of all credentials in one place and lightens our administrative load". CA Privileged Access Manager is most compared with CyberArk PAS, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Thycotic Secret Server, whereas CyberArk PAS is most compared with BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, SailPoint IdentityIQ and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine). See our CA Privileged Access Manager vs. CyberArk PAS report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Balamurali P
Anonymous User
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Privileged Access Manager vs. CyberArk PAS and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
371,639 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
It reduces the viral attacks on my website. It also allows certain users access to see what happens daily.We have received good support from the tech support team.CA PAM is working well for us.The DB clustering is a really good benefit of using CA PAM.We can enforce complicated password policies and very important frequent password changes.The product is very scalable in terms of concurrent sessions that it can handle at a time, number of device it can support, accounts that it can manage, or number of nodes that you can deploy in a cluster.The key benefits are we improve our governance. We ensure we can build more trust in the way we run and operate our environment, and most of all is the accountability.One of the key things for us about the product is around its simplicity. Being able to put in the technology that allows the business to remove complexity and also allow the security improvements.

Read more »

The Password Upload Utility tool makes it easier when setting up a Safe that contains multiple accounts and has cut down the amount of time that it takes to complete the task.For a while, there were individual IDs having privileged access. We wanted to restrict that. We implemented the solution so that it can be more of internal control. We can have session recordings happening and reduce our attacks.There are no issues with scalability. Our clients are very happy to use the product.We are maintaining compliance in PCI, SOX and HIPPA, which is a big thing. Auditors really like it, and it has made us stay compliant.We are able to know who is accessing what and when; having accountability.This solution is quite stable.The most valuable feature is that it always provides flexibility, password quality and one-time user check-in and check-out.I really like the PTA (Privileged Threat Analytics). I find this the best feature.

Read more »

Cons
The setup is complex.I would like this solution to be simpler. It should have a one-click access that works together with AWS.An improvement for this solution is that it should not be constantly based on user name and password. There should be a condition to edit and update your username.We experience stability issues after every patch upgrade. This is a place where CA needs to improve drastically.The service account management functionality needs to be extended to application pools, SQL database, PowerShell scripts, service account discovery, etc.Bring more technology into the portfolio and being able to collapse those products into a much more integrated way.They need to do a little bit more on the mainframe side.​Instead of just giving passwords to the user based on job function, from auditing perspective, turn that cycle around. That would really help from an auditing standpoint.

Read more »

Currently, in Secure Connect, an end user is required to enter account information manually, and cannot save any of this information for future use.Integration with the ticketing system should allow any number of fields to be used for validation before allowing a user to be evaluated and able to access a server.The initial setup of CyberArk is a challenge if you do not have prior experience with it.Make it easier to deploy.I think having a distributed architecture would certainly help this solution.There was a functionality of the solution that was missing. I had noticed it in Beyond Trust, but not in this solution. But, recently they have incorporated something similar.If we could have some kind of out-of-the box feature that you can simply say "no" so they don't have to go into a development mode, that would a really helpful feature.Tech support staff can be more proactive.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It is reasonably priced.It is more expensive than other solutions on the market.I would prefer better licensing options for the 20-100 users we have at a given time.Pricing is fair compared to other top vendors.The licensing is simple and scalable.Cost-wise, CA was better compared to others in the market. ​

Read more »

In comparison to other products on the market, CyberArk is a more costly product.This solution is considered to be more expensive than others out there on the market today.I do not have any opinions to add about the pricing of the product.No, I do not have any advice on the price of the product.Network and security licenses are currently being managed by other outsource vendors, so they are facing some type of problems in the digital aspect.With reducing the privileged account access, there has been a huge improvement. They are now bringing more accounts on a little at a time.If you are looking at implementing this solution, buy the training and go to it.Our risk is definitely significantly lower. Also, our resources are low.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management solutions are best for your needs.
371,639 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
6,909
Comparisons
3,228
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
459
Avg. Rating
7.9
Views
30,366
Comparisons
15,822
Reviews
51
Average Words per Review
571
Avg. Rating
9.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 10% of the time.
Also Known As
CA PAM, Xceedium XsuiteCyberArk Privileged Access Security, CyberArk Privileged Account Security, SSH Key Manager, Privileged Session Manager, Privileged Threat Analytics, Application Identity Manager, On-Demand Privileges Manager, Endpoint Privilege Manager
Learn
CA (A Broadcom Company)
CyberArk
Overview

CA Privileged Access Manager is a simple-to-deploy, automated, proven solution for privileged access management in physical, virtual and cloud environments. It enhances security by protecting sensitive administrative credentials such as root and administrator passwords, controlling privileged user access, proactively enforcing policies and monitoring and recording privileged user activity across all IT resources.  It includes CA PAM Server Control (previously CA Privileged Identity Manager) for fine-grained protection of critical servers

CyberArk is the trusted expert in privileged account security. Designed from the ground up with a focus on security, CyberArk has developed a powerful, modular technology platform that provides the industry's most comprehensive Privileged Account Security Solution.

Offer
Learn more about CA Privileged Access Manager
Learn more about CyberArk PAS
Sample Customers
NEOVERA, Telesis, eSoftRockwell Automation
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm25%
Retailer19%
Comms Service Provider13%
Logistics Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm26%
Software R&D Company21%
Comms Service Provider15%
Government10%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm28%
Insurance Company15%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
Healthcare Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company25%
Financial Services Firm16%
Comms Service Provider11%
Retailer8%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise5%
Large Enterprise72%
REVIEWERS
Small Business16%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise73%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise79%
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Privileged Access Manager vs. CyberArk PAS and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
371,639 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management 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.
Sign Up with Email