We performed a comparison between CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager and Panda Adaptive Defense 360 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is that it does lifecycle management and that it will change to whatever the end target is."
"The feature called PTA, which stands for Privileged Threat Analytics keeps track of what admins are doing and works with Centimeters. If something fishy is going on with a user's credentials, it alerts the security team so they can act fast. Plus, it automates stuff like resetting credentials or blocking users. So, if there's a potential hack, CyberArk can change passwords and lock out users in a snap. It also gives you a heads-up if anything unusual is going on with server activities, like someone creating new users with uncontrolled credentials."
"CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is very easy to manage, which I like. The solution also has a dashboard where you can see which software is suspicious, which I find valuable."
"Users can scale the solution."
"I have always found that CyberArk is a very tight, foolproof product compared to most other products available."
"The solution allows me to give access and privileges to each user individually"
"It offers great performance."
"We were able to reduce the number of privileged accounts by 50%, which helped to simplify our privileged access management environment."
"The dashboard management feature is valuable."
"The protection from malware is the most important feature. It has some endpoint information about the vehicle of the virus, malware, etc. It is also stable and easy to install, and they also provide good technical support."
"Their remote management (RMM) is very good."
"I've found it's got excellent web protection."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that I like the tool's UI, ease of management, ease of making reports, and the ability to export information easily."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter application control."
"Adaptive Defense is pretty easy to use, and Panda support is excellent."
"The feature I find most valuable is the advance search engine."
"For an experienced system implementer it will take approximately one day. However, for somebody who is inexperienced it may take up to five days."
"The solution can be complex to use at times."
"CyberArk is a pretty heavy solution."
"They need much better integration with Azure AD."
"CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager can be better by making its UI more consistent."
"CyberArk meets clients' need very spot-on. It covers everything customers ask for. As for improvements, honestly, the feedback's been really positive. I haven't heard any specific areas that need work."
"Performance could be better. We have a couple of problems with CyberArk right now. One of the problems is performance in our environment. Support also takes a long time to respond. If the user already has local admin rights, then I can't collect any events in the console from this device. There are also some options in CyberArk that are not working properly, and are not helpful in this case. I can't collect any information to create a proper policy for the device. I have to investigate everything manually, or even disable the local admin from the device. I can collect the events only after this, and it's very time consuming. In my case, it's a waste of resources."
"The product needs a streamlined user interface; improvements to the user interface can enhance user experience and make the solution more intuitive to navigate."
"The Linux installation is performed on the command line and they need a package installer for that operating system."
"It needs improvements in its EDR and its ability to manage all the nodes. I'd like better communication between the console and the nodes, so I don't have to remote into each individual machine that's having an issue with the protection."
"It would be nice if Panda Security Adaptive Defense could come out with remote desktop usage."
"t would help if it would monitor the network better."
"It needs some improvements in the DNS security feature. Currently, it does not have full DNS security. It only has semi-DNS security, which can be improved. It is an important feature for us, and it would be really good if they can improve the DNS security feature. Our group has some plans to change to Cisco AMP, which has features such as DNS, Umbrella. We are trying to learn about Cisco AMP and compare it with Panda."
"Panda Security Adaptive Defense’s stability could be improved."
"The stability could be improved. My teammates who use Panda Security and I have experienced some issues."
"I'd like to integrate it into my main services."
More CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is ranked 6th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 26 reviews while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is ranked 19th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 25 reviews. CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is rated 8.0, while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager writes "Offers integrated solutions and expands its capabilities through strategic acquisitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 writes "Managing multiple machines is a pain, but support is top notch". CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, CrowdStrike Falcon, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Tanium, whereas Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager vs. Panda Adaptive Defense 360 report.
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.
