We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and NetIQ Access Manager 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."Securely protects our TAP/NUID and privileged access accounts within the company."
"The most valuable feature is Special Monitoring."
"Lessens the risk with privileged access."
"Helped us meet our standards and requirements to help us comply with industry standards and banking regulations."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager's main benefit is it provides secure access to our servers. There are features to capture the user activity, it provides video recording processing. If the users are logged in to the server, we can see what activities they are performing. It's a very nice tool for Privileged Access Management. They have plenty of useful services and the solution has fulfilled our needs."
"All access to our servers by both staff and vendors is monitored and recorded."
"PSM (Privilege Session Manager."
"It improves security in our company. We have more than 10,000 accounts that we manage in CyberArk. We use these accounts for SQLs, Windows Server, and Unix. Therefore, keeping these passwords up-to-date in another solution or software would be impossible. Now, we have some sort of a platform to manage passwords, distribute the inflow, and manage IT teams as well as making regular changes to it according to the internal security policies in our bank."
"The most valuable features of NetIQ Access Manager are SSO and Multi-Factor Authentication."
"It's very easy to integrate with applications."
"There are lots of options to customize the solution to your needs."
"The single sign-on feature is excellent."
"The features that we have found most valuable with NetIQ Access Manager are its single sign-on and two factor two second factor database."
"This product needs professional consulting services to onboard accounts effectively based user profiles."
"They need to provide better training for the System Integrator."
"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."
"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."
"Their post-sale support area requires a big improvement. Customers cannot automate tickets directly with CyberArk. They have to come through the distributor or bring in partners who have access to the support portal. Basically, the support for post-sales implementation is there, but the role of CyberArk is very minimal. Customers have to rely on partners, which sometimes creates issues. Some of the vendors help you during the implementation process, but the CyberArk support team does not do that. They have 24/7 support for our region, but they help only if there is an emergency or there is a problem with their system. If the password vault is down or the system is down, they provide immediate attention. For almost everything else, they take more time to respond. They give low priority to service-related or migration-related questions."
"If we could have some kind of out-of-the box feature that you can simply say "no" so they don't have to go into a development mode, that would a really helpful feature."
"The solution needs better features for end users to manage their own whitelisting for API retrieval."
"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."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the security of the infrastructure and the server and the working networking device."
"Classification of junctions and new versions of applications, such as APIs, can be added to enable the use of more devices that utilize biometrics for Multi-Factor Authentication to improve the solution."
"Having the ability to easily extract and view and compare and version control configurations would be ideal."
"I would love to see the upgrade procedure handled more effectively. I would prefer to have OVS installation possibilities, although the upgrade procedures should include the OS as well. You should be able to use the whole application as an appliance."
"The application portal could be improved with more options and easier customization."
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 NetIQ Access Manager is ranked 14th in Access Management with 5 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while NetIQ Access Manager 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 NetIQ Access Manager writes "Multi-Factor Authentication, stable, and extremely scalable". 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 NetIQ Access Manager is most compared with Okta Workforce Identity, Microsoft Entra ID, Auth0 and Symantec Siteminder. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. NetIQ Access Manager 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.
