We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Auth0, Okta and others in Access Management."Provides improved security around having your credentials locked down and rotated regularly."
"Allows secure, logged access to highly sensitive servers and services."
"It's secure and reliable. I especially appreciate that it's locked down and only allows access to authorized components."
"All access to our servers by both staff and vendors is monitored and recorded."
"The Vault offers great capabilities for structuring and accessing data."
"The threat analytics is an important feature."
"Technical support has been very responsive in navigating challenges. It is very easy to open a ticket."
"The regulation of accounts is by far the most needed and valuable part of the application."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is that they are open to connecting with any token. For example, a year ago, we were looking for a soft token, and we started to look for alternatives. They are open to connecting with any token that we looking for."
"The solution has high support capability."
More i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management Pros →
"For users to access a system via CyberArk Privileged Session Manager, a universal connector needs to be coded in a language called AutoIT and its support for web browsers is so-so. Other products like Centrify have browser plugins that can help automate the process when using their products."
"We had an issue with the Copy feature... Apparently, in version 10, that Copy feature does not work. You actually have to click Show and then copy the password from within Show and then paste it. We've had a million tickets and we had to figure out a workaround to it."
"Overall what I would really love to see is the third-party PAS reporter tool pulled more into the overall solution, ideally as its own deployable component service installation package."
"Currently, in Secure Connect, an end user is required to enter account information manually, and cannot save any of this information for future use."
"There is a bit of a learning curve, but it's a pretty complex solution."
"One thing that could be improved is to create of a better alternative for fixing group policy fees. We currently use Microsoft, but they have introduced new policies that may not be compatible."
"It is very complex and difficult to set up the solution."
"We need a bit more education for our user community because they are not using it to its capabilities."
"The user interface is not quite good and easy to use. There are a lot of menus, and the look and feel is not modern like a modern app."
"The tool needs to improve its cloud capability."
More i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management Cons →
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management is ranked 23rd in Access Management with 2 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management 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 i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management writes "A stable and scalable solution with reasonable pricing ". 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 i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management is most compared with .
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.