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."This is a complete solution that can detect cyber attacks well."
"We are able to rotate privileged user passwords to eliminate fraudulent use."
"Rather than multiple tools for maintaining regulatory compliance around passwords and privileged accounts, we have centralized as much as possible with CyberArk. This is now a one stop shop for end users to access their elevated credentials."
"If any intruder gets inside, they would not be able to move around nor do lateral movements. It minimize any attack problems within our network."
"Automatic password management, which will automatically change passwords based on compliance requirements."
"I really like the PTA (Privileged Threat Analytics). I find this the best feature."
"You can write different types of policies for custom business needs or any developer needs. If they need certain functions allocated, they can be customized easily."
"The automatic rotation of credentials is probably the most useful feature."
"It's quite scalable."
"Federation is valuable, for sure, because we have a lot of third-party vendors that we need to integrate with, and this is a turnkey solution in some ways."
"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."
"Authentication & Authorization are important because all the sites need authentication for security purposes. That has been handled pretty well all these years with SSO."
"It has the ability to authenticate and authorize users. It is the main feature for our security."
"We almost never have outages nor see slowdowns."
"It is very scalable. We have a very large customer base: 75 million customers."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with the Active Directory."
"One of our current issues is a publishing issue. If we whitelist Google Chrome, all the events of Google Chrome should be gone. It is not happening."
"It is very complex and difficult to set up the solution."
"We would, of course, always prefer it if the pricing was cheaper."
"CyberArk PAM is a very broad product as everyone's requirements for implementation are different. In our particular case, the initial implementation was planned and developed by people who didn't know our specific network requirements, so the initial implementation needed to be tweaked over time. While this is normal, at the time all these "major" changes required CyberArk professional services to come in-plant and "assist" with the changes."
"The product documentation has to be more precise in certain aspects with explanations for functionality limitations along with reference material or screenshots."
"The web interface has come a long way, but the PrivateArk client seems clunky and not intuitive. It could use an update to be brought up to speed with the usability of PVWA."
"The admin interface of the Password Vault Web Access (PVWA) is moving from an old style (the classic interface) to a new style (the v10 interface) and unfortunately, this process is quite slow."
"The greatest area of improvement is with the user interface of the Password Vault Web Access component."
"The initial setup was complex, painful. But that is to be expected of any new setup. When you're a big bank like us, any kind of migration to a new product is hard. I expect it to be painful, and it was painful. But it's not something that you can avoid."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see a move towards the newer technologies, which is what we are doing right now. I think that's in the roadmap that's coming, in the 12.8 and 14 releases, but we would like to have it sooner than later."
"I think they need to integrate some of the newer types of authentication into the product. I'm not seeing the innovation when it comes to biometrics in the product."
"We are finding some compatibility issues. We're still working with CA on them."
"I'd like to see a rework of the user directory configuration."
"All the problems that we reported actually have never been resolved. We could not capture enough information for CA to be able to debug the problem."
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.
