We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Symantec Advanced Threat Protection 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."CyberArk has helped us to identify, store, protect, and monitor the usage of privileged accounts."
"We are maintaining compliance in PCI, SOX and HIPPA, which is a big thing. Auditors really like it, and it has made us stay compliant."
"The solution helps our developers access internal systems. It also helps us in Privilege Access Management."
"It has a centralized page where you can manage everything. This makes work easier. You don't have to remember different module URLs or browser applications. It is very easy to get all the secure identities of other environments into a single page, which is very important for us as it helps a lot in terms of operations, e.g., reduces management time. This is a single page where you can manage all accounts and onboard them to the CyberArk. You can then secure and see passwords from everywhere. So, there is a single pane of glass where you can manage all the identities across environments as well as across different types of identities."
"We like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"The technical support is good."
"What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users."
"This is a complete solution that can detect cyber attacks well."
"Symantec Endpoint Protection provides end-to-end protection. Along with antivirus protection, it has a lot of key areas, including intrusive prevention, firewall features, and application and device control."
"Currently we have 800-plus nodes connected with this solution, without any issues. The solution is scalable."
"The great advantage in using this product is it creates multiple services."
"Endpoint to network protects the line."
"The most valuable feature is Click-time URL protection."
"The Application Control code and the easy integration are valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is NetFlow threat protection."
"You don't have to buy a separate email security platform. You can enable that using their endpoint, and I like that. You don't have to have two agents running on the same box."
"The greatest area of improvement is with the user interface of the Password Vault Web Access component."
"I'd like to see a more expansive SSH tunneling situation through PSMP. Right now you have an account that exists in the vault and you say, "I want to create a tunnel using this account." I'd like to see something that is not account-based where I could say, "I want to create a tunnel to this machine over here," and then authenticate through the PSMP and then your tunnel is set up. You wouldn't need to then authenticate to a machine."
"The current interface is not very intuitive."
"The initial setup has room for improvement to be more straightforward."
"Initial setup is complex. Lots of architecture, lots of planning, and lots of education and training are needed."
"The solution could improve by adding more connectors."
"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."
"They are sometimes not flexible with things. For instance, from one day to another, there might be something that had been done years ago by CyberArk, then they say, "We do not support that." You then have to initiate a complaint and start working with them. Things might become complicated and months pass while you are working with them. Usually, they are good and fast, but sometimes they seem to be blocked with problems, e.g., you will suddenly be working with another team instead of the team that you were working with the day before."
"There are limits with respect to blocking files by hash value or blocking IP addresses, and these limits should be removed."
"Scalability could be better."
"Entire threat protection is not available for the advanced features."
"The support has dropped down to a five out of ten."
"It also needs network-based threat protection for shared folders and files."
"The support for new OSs and older OSs could be a little tighter. They need to be more upfront about what protection services they're going to provide on new OSs. I haven't seen the Windows 11 version out yet. It is either already released in Beta, or the Beta will be released soon. There could be a little bit more advanced updates on what they're doing to help protect Windows 11 environments. They can let us know in advance so that we know it is going to be protected. We can't roll out the new OS without putting end-point protection on it. So, they should tell us what is their support model for that, and what are they doing to protect Windows 11. They're not telling me, and that's a criticism. The same issue is applicable to all the other antivirus tools. It is not just Symantec; all of them have this problem."
"The security features need to be improved."
"Symantec appliances need improvement. The whole appliance environment is a robust system and it needs a massive amount of storage space. If you have to increase or speed up the background storage it's a pretty complicated process. The scalability and sizing is critical, and if you do it wrong you run into issues pretty quickly."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Advanced Threat Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is ranked 18th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 14 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection is rated 7.8. 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 Advanced Threat Protection writes "Provides end-to-end antivirus protection and has good stability ". 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 Advanced Threat Protection is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Trellix Network Detection and Response, Check Point SandBlast Network and Fortinet FortiSandbox. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Symantec Advanced Threat Protection 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.
