We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"When we started with RPA, there was a requirement that every credential and the bots themselves be protected through the PAM system. From the get-go, we've had CyberArk in the middle... We've got a pretty robust RPA implementation with our PAM platform. Users, bots, the credentials — everything is managed via our PAM solution."
"Right off the bat, the most valuable feature is the DNA scan. It gives us the ability to scan our environment and find the accounts that we're going to need to take under control."
"CyberArk is a very stable product and it's a stable product because it has a simple design and a simple architecture that allows you to leverage the economies of scale across the base of your infrastructure that you already have implemented. It doesn't really introduce any new complex pieces of infrastructure that would make it that much more difficult to scale."
"CyberArk has been easy for us to implement and the adoption has been good. We've been able to standardize a bunch of things. We've been able to standardize relatively easily with the use of the platforms and managing the policies."
"The risk of lost password and forbidden access to resources has been drastically reduced which increased the security level for the entire company,"
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature is Special Monitoring."
"The Password Upload Utility tool makes it easier when setting up a Safe that contains multiple accounts and has cut down the amount of time that it takes to complete the task."
"The most valuable feature is MVX, which tests all of the files that have been received in an email."
"The server appliance is good."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."
"I also like its logging method. Its logging is very powerful and useful for forensic purposes. You can see the traffic or a specific activity or how something entered your network and where it went."
"Very functional and good for detecting malicious traffic."
"The one place where we found that this product really needs to improve is the cloud. Simple integrations don't exist, even today. We don't have anything specific on CyberArk for managing, SaaS products, SaaS vendors, SaaS credentials. I understand it's a vendor-based thing and that they have to coordinate with the other vendors to be able to do that, and there are integrations coming. But these are the major places where CyberArk definitely needs to invest some more time."
"It's a big program. To scale excessively, locally, on an on-prem application, takes a lot of servers."
"CyberArk has to continue to evolve with that threat landscape to make sure that they're still protecting those credentials that are owned by those that have privileged accounts in the firms."
"There is a bit of a learning curve, but it's a pretty complex solution."
"It needs better documentation with more examples for the configuration files and API/REST integration"
"We found a lot of errors during the initial setup. They should work to improve the implementation experience and to remove errors from the process."
"The authentication port is available in CyberArk Alero but not Fortinet products."
"Currently, in Secure Connect, an end user is required to enter account information manually, and cannot save any of this information for future use."
"It would be very helpful if there were better integration with other solutions from other vendors, such as Fortinet and Palo Alto."
"Technical packaging could be improved."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
"I heard that FireEye recently was hacked, and a lot of things were revealed. We would like FireEye to be more secure as an organization. FireEye has to be more protective because it is one of the most critical devices that we are using in our environment. They have a concept called SSL decryption, but that is only the packet address. We would like FireEye to also do a lot of decryption inside the packet. Currently, FireEye only does encryption and decryption of the header, but we would like them to do encryption and decryption of the entire packet."
"Its documentation can be improved. The main problem that I see with FireEye is the documentation. We are an official distributor and partner of FireEye, and we have access to complete documentation about how to configure or implement this technology, but for customers, very limited documentation is available openly. This is the area in which FireEye should evolve. All documents should be easily available for everyone."
"They can maybe consider supporting some compliance standards. When we are configuring rules and policies, it can guide whether they are compliant with a particular compliance authority. In addition, if I have configured some rules that have not been used, it should give a report saying that these rules have not been used in the last three months or six months so that I disable or delete those rules."
"Technical support could be improved."
"I believe that this solution is priced well. It's the market leader and I think that it's the best solution."
"Overall, its pricing is really good. The main difference from all the other vendors is that they have one package that covers all the functionality and modules of the basic PAM, except the add-on modules like adware and server protection. It also doesn't include the licenses for domain controller protection or maybe an API call-related feature. For the basic privileged access management, the bundle pricing is really good, but when it comes to an agent-based solution for advanced cyber protection or application identity managers, it is expensive. Services are also very expensive if you hire the services team from CyberArk, but these guys are really good. For a couple of large banking projects, we had an experience with them. The banks wanted to have things quickly and efficiently, so we had to hire them. If we take four weeks, these guys can do everything on a weekend. They charge quite a big sum of money, but they know the system well."
"The price of this solution is quite reasonable."
"The solution is very expensive and requires a license. We pay for an enterprise license."
"Pricing is quite high and it could be improved."
"They have two types of licensing: purchase and subscription. You have to pay for each admin user, such as Microsoft admin, mail admin, database admin, etc."
"The user fee is not as high but the maintenance fee is expensive."
"It's an expensive solution."
"Its price is a bit high. A small customer cannot buy it. Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
CyberArk is the trusted expert in privileged access management and a global leader Identity Security. Designed from the ground up with a focus on security, CyberArk has developed a powerful, modular technology platform that provides the industry's most comprehensive Privileged Account Security Solution.
FireEye Network Security is an advanced threat protection and breach detection platform that provides industry leading threat visibility and protection against the world’s most sophisticated and damaging attacks. By leveraging FireEye’s unique technologies and threat intelligence, FireEye Network Security detects what other security solutions miss, providing holistic security from the perimeter to the network core.
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 15 reviews while FireEye Network Security is ranked 5th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 6 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.2, while FireEye Network Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Provides simplicity and ease of implementation for the right level of security controls". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FireEye Network Security writes "A reliable and complete network protection solution that protects from signature-based and signature-less attacks and has powerful logging". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Thycotic Secret Server, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, Azure Active Directory and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), whereas FireEye Network Security is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Stealthwatch and Check Point SandBlast Network. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. FireEye Network Security 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.