We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and NetWitness Platform 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 credentials management capability is key to ensuring that the credentials are kept secure and that access to them is done on a temporary and event-driven basis."
"The automatic rotation of credentials is probably the most useful feature."
"It allows users to self-provision access to the accounts that they need."
"Technical support is very helpful whenever we have any questions."
"On the EBB user side, we were able to secure all the server root passwords and admin for Windows. This was a big win for us."
"There are no issues with scalability. Our clients are very happy to use the product."
"We utilize PTA, and we are now integrating that into our risk management program so we can identify the uses of the vault which are outside of the norm, e.g., people accessing after hours. It has reduced the amount of time that we are looking through logs and audit logs."
"The technical support is good."
"Alerting Module: It provides real-time event processing language on all the logs/packets stream for advanced alerting, i.e., using SQL LIKE statements."
"The most valuable features are the packet decoder, log decoder, and concentrator."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to write rules and triggers for network communication, and then being able to investigate based on that."
"The product has a user-friendly interface and a valuable feature for threat intelligence integration."
"Incident management is its most valuable feature."
"NetWitness can be highly beneficial for incident detection and response."
"The newer 11.5 version that my team is using has found it to have good mapping."
"It's quite economical compared to other solutions in the market."
"I'm not a fan of technical support with CyberArk. It's like jumping through red tape and hoops. Quite frankly, it's almost like when you call CyberArk you get the Help Desk or the level-one. I'm a level-one. I got the CCD, I know how to do the initial troubleshooting. When I call CyberArk it's because I can't figure the problem out. So I need a level-two, three, four. I don't need you to tell me, "Hey, open a ticket and then give me logs.""
"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."
"PAM could be more user-friendly and CyberArk could update the documentation to include more real-world examples. You have to learn it yourself through trial and error. In particular, the online documentation should have more information about troubleshooting."
"The initial setup of CyberArk is a challenge if you do not have prior experience with it."
"Report creation could be improved. The policies could be more customized."
"They can do a better job in the PSM space."
"Make it easier to deploy."
"There is room for improvement in the availability of custom connectors on the marketplace for this solution. Additionally, their services for the CICD pipeline and ease of integration could be improved."
"The initial setup was complex because it takes a lot of time to complete the implementation."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The solution should have more integration capabilities with different platforms."
"They should implement algorithms to digest that data and produce additional, more advanced reporting, alerting and support of internal security teams."
"The log system is a bit complex and has room for improvement."
"If we have the ability to run a dynamic analysis through malware in the same suite, it would be great to have a sandbox solution to analyze malware through dynamic analysis."
"The user interface is a little bit difficult for new users and it needs to be improved."
"An area for improvement would be better automation and more inbuilt use cases."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while NetWitness Platform is ranked 20th in Log Management with 36 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. 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 NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". 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 NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel and Cisco Secure Network Analytics. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. NetWitness Platform 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.