We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and IBM Security Secret Server 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."Lessens the risk with privileged access."
"It takes people out of the machine work of ensuring credentials remain up-to-date, and handles connection brokering such that human usage and credential management remain independent."
"All of the features of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are valuable."
"I find value in notifications from CyberArk when passwords fail verification and have other issues."
"Its' quite stable."
"CyberArk has allowed us to get the credentials and passwords out of hard-coded property files."
"They just released Marketplace, and they are constantly releasing updates to the components and adding new components, like Conjur. This is something that we ran into with Secret Server and DevOps, so it is already scalable, but becoming more so in the future."
"Their legacy of more than 20 years is very valuable. It brings a lot of stability to the product and a wide variety of integration with the ecosystem. Because of these factors, it has also been very successful in deployment. So, the legacy and integration with other technologies make the PAM platform very stable and strong. In terms of features, most of the other vendors are still focusing just on the privileged access management or session recording, but CyberArk has incorporated artificial intelligence to make PAM a more proactive system. They have implemented threat analytics into this, and there is also a lot of focus on domain controller production, Windows Server protection, and stuff like that. They have also further advanced it with the security on the cloud and DevOps systems. They have a bundle licensing model, which really helps. They don't have a complex licensing model. Even though in our market, people say CyberArk is expensive as compared to some of the other products, but in terms of overall value and as a bundling solution, it is an affordable and highly scalable product."
"Stability-wise, I think it is a very good solution."
"What I like best about IBM Security Secret Server is its single-access console. It's also easy to manage and fulfills the requirements with the least resistance."
"The live recording is a very useful feature."
"As a PAM solution, Secret Server performs all the use cases in our environment."
"One of the most valuable features is scalability, and how it allows you to scale it without affecting the underlying core components."
"More than the product itself, there is room for improvement in the documentation. The documentation should be very detailed and very structured. It has a lot of good information, on one level, but I feel that it could be more elaborate and more structured."
"The continuous scanning of the assets is limited to Windows and Unix. We like to have the solution scan any databases, network devices, and security devices for privileged accounts. That would be very helpful."
"Currently, in Secure Connect, an end user is required to enter account information manually, and cannot save any of this information for future use."
"I would like to see is the policy export and import. When we expend, we do not want to just hand do a policy."
"The documentation is rather basic and it is missing many use cases."
"If there is an area that has room for improvement, it's probably working with their support and getting people on the phone. That is hard to do with most products in general, but that seems to be the difficult area. The product is fantastic, but sometimes we want somebody on the phone."
"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."
"There were a lot of manual steps in the initial setup which could have been automated. I read the 10.4 release that was sent out about a month or two ago, and I saw the steps required for upgrade have been reduced by about 90%. That was a big thing for me, but I still haven't seen that yet because we have not upgrade past 9.9.5."
"The newer interface is more difficult to use than the previous one, and consequently, new users might need more training."
"The nonclustered index is working in an area with a problem that needs improvement."
"What needs improvement in IBM Security Secret Server is support. The local partner provides good support, but IBM itself doesn't. Most of the time, the IBM support team does not aggressively resolve issues reported through chat or the IBM website."
"It would be preferable if the full proxy was included in the IBM Security Secret Server."
"Secret Server should have the ability to discover privileged accounts in the servers, like the administrator or users, from SQL and Oracle without having to import a script."
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 IBM Security Secret Server is ranked 13th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 7 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while IBM Security Secret Server is rated 8.2. 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 IBM Security Secret Server writes "User-friendly, granular features, and is simple to implement, but the technical support could be improved". 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 IBM Security Secret Server is most compared with Delinea Secret Server and Delinea Privileged Access Service. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. IBM Security Secret Server report.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
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.