We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Symantec Siteminder based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is an extremely scalable solution."
"It has the ability to scale out. We have scaled out quite a bit with our product and use of it to get to multiple locations and businesses, so it has the breadth to do that."
"Helped us meet our standards and requirements to help us comply with industry standards and banking regulations."
"CyberArk has resulted in a massive increase in our security footprint."
"Allows secure, logged access to highly sensitive servers and services."
"Technical support has been very responsive in navigating challenges. It is very easy to open a ticket."
"PSM (Privilege Session Manager."
"This is a complete solution that can detect cyber attacks well."
"It has the ability to authenticate and authorize users. It is the main feature for our security."
"SAML is the best thing we're using right now because there is no need for creating an external account."
"The most valuable feature is the Federation part of Single Sign On, which is customizable and is easily integrated with any customer application or any third party application."
"I liked the debugging part. There are only two files (trace file and log file) that you need to look into while performing debugging, and the logs give you the exact info on where and what needs to be fixed."
"If you look at our organization, and really all financial institutions, we have a lot of legacy apps. So it really helps to get Single Sign-On."
"A valuable feature of Siteminder is the way it handles bulk traffic. The features it has, in terms of routing the traffic and load balancing, are good."
"The single sign-on is the solution's most valuable feature"
"IWA is an out-of-the-box feature. The SAML-based federation is standard for all tools. However, CA Single Sign-On has made the federation configuration way too simple and handy to set up and use."
"More additional features as far as the REST is concerned, because we have something which was the predecessor to REST. A lot of the features which were in the predecessor have not necessarily been ported over to REST yet."
"The initial setup was somewhat complex."
"We'd like to see the creation of some kind of memo field for each device account, which could be used, in our network at least, to leave a note about the device for either the security or network engineering team members."
"Performance of PIM could be better and intended for usability as well as security."
"The web access piece needs improvement. We have version 9.5 or 9.9.5, and now we have to upgrade to version 10."
"Initial setup is complex. Lots of architecture, lots of planning, and lots of education and training are needed."
"The issue of technical support is crucial, as there are not many specialized partners available in Brazil to provide this service. While English language support is of good quality, there is a significant shortage of partners capable of meeting the demand locally."
"This is probably a common thing, but they do ask for a lot of log files, a lot of information. They ask you to provide a lot of information to them before they're willing to give you anything at all upfront. It would be better if they were a little more give-and-take upfront: "Why don't you try these couple of things while we take your log files and stuff and go research them?" A little bit of that might be more helpful."
"We would like to the OAuth be more stable, more issues being fixed rather than not."
"I would prefer to see their SAML integration be a more streamlined and easier interface."
"I'd like to see a rework of the user directory configuration."
"Better documentation. I went through some sessions on single sign-on for version 12.7."
"An area Siteminder could improve on is that there are a few limitations, in terms of new protocols for OpenID. If I want to have different scopes, the features are limited. They also do not have APIs exposed, which is a major drawback. API is a feature I would like to see included in the next release."
"The technical support could be better."
"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."
"We're currently unable to find information about if the solution can do a full implementation with SQL. Some better and more accessible documentation for new users or those curious about the product would be helpful."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while Symantec Siteminder is ranked 17th in Access Management with 69 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Symantec Siteminder is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Siteminder writes "Easy to implement and customize and very stable". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard, whereas Symantec Siteminder is most compared with PingFederate, ForgeRock, Okta Workforce Identity, PingID and IBM Tivoli Federated Identity Manager. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Symantec Siteminder report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all 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.