Compare CA Privileged Access Manager vs. One Identity Safeguard

CA Privileged Access Manager is ranked 3rd in Privileged Access Management with 8 reviews while One Identity Safeguard is ranked 4th in Privileged Access Management with 7 reviews. CA Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.8, while One Identity Safeguard is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CA Privileged Access Manager writes "It will provide us with more security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of One Identity Safeguard writes "We are able to demonstrate what has happened on systems and who did what, but we want to be able to generate CSRs from the interface for certificates". CA Privileged Access Manager is most compared with CyberArk PAS, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Thycotic Secret Server, whereas One Identity Safeguard is most compared with CyberArk PAS, ObserveIT and SailPoint IdentityIQ. See our CA Privileged Access Manager vs. One Identity Safeguard report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Privileged Access Manager vs. One Identity Safeguard and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
371,917 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 »

All sessions are audited and they are indexed/searchable through the GUI.The most unique and valuable features are the upstream and downstream throughput capacities; the Safeguard platform provides agile integration. In actuality, all the features are valuable. They're good, user-friendly.The transparent mode for privileged sessions is a very good solution.It is easy to manage. There is a very logical, clear user interface. Also, the integration of scripts is thoughtfully implemented. Overall, it's a nice product to manage.The technical support is tremendous.The transparent mode for privileged sessions is one of the best thing for customers, because they don't see the system in-between.The system is easy to manage, as it is not a system that you will change everything all of a sudden. It evolves most of the time with customer requests.The extensible framework for authentication is one of the most valuable features. We use an MFA plug-in and a lot of different factors, depending on what the business use-cases are. And of course, the auditing functionality is also valuable.

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 »

Monitoring of the platform should be easier and more functional so that you can have a clear picture of the running service.Our experience with technical support has been disappointing. We require more prompt and faster response times. We require answers to our questions right away but we haven't received that level of support.On a scale of one to ten, the stability is an eight.The high availability function of the box requires a long time to switch over from one appliance to another.The automated change of the passwords, which is now integrated, could be improved to be more flexible regarding different systems.For some users, the physical appliance has been a bit buggy.We would like to be able to generate certificate signing requests (CSRs) from the interface for certificates.Even though we have two nodes, there's no way to do an upgrade without taking everything completely offline. It would be nice if they could improve that.

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 »

The full license is expensive but if you plan to use it in a big organization then it is the best option because it is more flexible.Setup cost, pricing and licensing are all very expensive.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management solutions are best for your needs.
371,917 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
2,558
Comparisons
1,172
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
448
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Compared 11% of the time.
Also Known As
CA PAM, Xceedium Xsuite
Learn
CA (A Broadcom Company)
One Identity
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

One Identity Safeguard securely stores, manages, records and analyzes privileged accounts and access. It is an integrated solution that combines a secure hardened password safe and a session management and monitoring solution with threat detection and analytics.

Offer
Learn more about CA Privileged Access Manager
See it in Action

Learn More About Safeguard

Sample Customers
NEOVERA, Telesis, eSoftCavium
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm25%
Retailer19%
Government13%
Comms Service Provider13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm26%
Software R&D Company21%
Comms Service Provider15%
Government10%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Privileged Access Manager vs. One Identity Safeguard and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
371,917 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