We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and NetWitness Platform 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."The ability to develop and deploy applications with no stored secrets is very valuable."
"It enables us to secure accounts and make sure they are compliant."
"With CyberArk, you can be fully confident that your existing accounts are secure. You will be 100 percent"
"The regulation of accounts is by far the most needed and valuable part of the application."
"We are able to know who is accessing what and when; having accountability."
"PSM (Privilege Session Manager."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was not at all difficult."
"The newer 11.5 version that my team is using has found it to have good mapping."
"The most valuable feature of RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets are the alerts and correlations tools."
"It's quite economical compared to other solutions in the market."
"Possibility to investigate incidents based on logs and raw packets, such as extracting files sent over the network"
"The most valuable feature is the ability to write rules and triggers for network communication, and then being able to investigate based on that."
"NetWitness can be highly beneficial for incident detection and response."
"It's fully scalable. There is no limit. Of course, the license limits per day the number of terabytes. In my opinion, it's very flexible."
"The current interface is not very intuitive."
"I think having a distributed architecture would certainly help this solution."
"The greatest area of improvement is with the user interface of the Password Vault Web Access component."
"The usual workload is sometimes delayed by the solution."
"In the beginning, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager didn't have a multifactor authentication feature, so that was an area for improvement, but now it's part of the solution. Having just one console for two CyberArk products would be good, particularly for the CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and the CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, with the latter being a product for endpoint management that supports the workstations and allows you to manage workstations. In the next update of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, it would be good to have a local agent where you can manage all users and processes, and have an agent on the servers such as Linux and Windows."
"There is a bit of a learning curve, but it's a pretty complex solution."
"The product could be easier to use. More work needs to be done on this aspect; it is not good enough yet. It also takes up a lot of server space. Sometimes we need to use up to seven servers."
"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."
"It should have a monitoring feature. It would help us analyze the current state of attacks faster from a single platform."
"An area for improvement would be better automation and more inbuilt use cases."
"The tool's integration capability isn't so great."
"If we have the ability to run a dynamic analysis through malware in the same suite, it would be great to have a sandbox solution to analyze malware through dynamic analysis."
"The initial setup is complex. There are other solutions that are easier to implement."
"We have encountered issues with unresolved crashes."
"I'd like to see improvement in its ease of use. It's basically unusable. It's overly complex."
"I believe that integrating the solution with other products such as Oracle would be beneficial."
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 NetWitness Platform is ranked 20th in Log Management with 36 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. 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 NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". 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 NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel and Cisco Secure Network Analytics. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. NetWitness Platform 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.