We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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."It enables us to secure accounts and make sure they are compliant."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is stable."
"DVR like video recording and text-based recording for easier audits."
"For a while, there were individual IDs having privileged access. We wanted to restrict that. We implemented the solution so that it can be more of internal control. We can have session recordings happening and reduce our attacks."
"CyberArk is not just an IT security or cybersecurity tool. It's also an administrator tool. I had a fair number of systems where the passwords were not fully managed by CyberArk yet, and they were expiring every 30 or 45 days. I was able to get management turned on for those accounts. From an administrator perspective, I didn't have to go back into those systems and manually change those passwords anymore. CyberArk... lightened the load on our administrative work."
"We are able to rotate privileged user passwords to eliminate fraudulent use."
"The most valuable feature of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is privileged threat analytics."
"The flexibility of integrating with other technologies is important because of a lot of applications - a lot of COTS products - are not supported when we are bringing the application IDs. The CyberArk platform provides a lot of opportunities to do customization."
"It ensures that every interaction, pre and post-loan processing, undergoes a thorough inspection, leveraging VPN features and comprehensive security protocols."
"The most valuable features are web control and IPS/IDS."
"Palo Alto’s Panorama centralized management system simplifies our security posture based on our requirements. Instead of manually pulling logs, then generating them into readable formats, it gives us the console in a readable format to view."
"We have reduced the number of configuration lines by 90%. We need fewer number of admins right now because of it."
"The interface with Panorama makes it very easy to use."
"It allows us to see all our traffic to properly secure it and only allow what is needed through the firewall."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It is reliable and the support is very good."
"This product needs professional consulting services to onboard accounts effectively based user profiles."
"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."
"Tech support staff can be more proactive."
"Its pricing is a big challenge here. When it started, the product came in at a very low cost. Now, they are the leaders in the market, so the cost has grown and is quite huge."
"We'd like to see the creation of some kind of memo field for each device account, which could be used, in our network at least, to leave a note about the device for either the security or network engineering team members."
"It is easily customized, and that customization makes it very easy to start trying to shoehorn the solution into roles it was never intended to fill."
"I would like to see better usability for non-technical people."
"The tool’s pricing and scalability can be better."
"The utilization monitoring and GUI have room for improvement."
"I would like to see a more thorough QA process. We have had some difficulties from bugs in releases."
"I would like to have automatic daily reporting, such as how many users have connected via SSL VPN."
"The tool is very costly."
"From time to time, they have released some content updates that have some issues, maybe twice a year."
"Palo Alto is that it is really bad when it comes to technical support."
"The product's AIOps process needs improvement."
"I would like a way to do everything programmatically, or be able to copy the configs from different prices at different levels."
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 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 52 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. 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 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". 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 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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.