We performed a comparison between CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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 most valuable feature of CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is its ability to reset passwords every time that it is needed or periodically."
"The department management aspect of the solution is the most valuable aspect."
"The feature called PTA, which stands for Privileged Threat Analytics keeps track of what admins are doing and works with Centimeters. If something fishy is going on with a user's credentials, it alerts the security team so they can act fast. Plus, it automates stuff like resetting credentials or blocking users. So, if there's a potential hack, CyberArk can change passwords and lock out users in a snap. It also gives you a heads-up if anything unusual is going on with server activities, like someone creating new users with uncontrolled credentials."
"CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager (EPM) 's most valuable feature is its ability to manage user application privileges and protect against ransomware attacks by controlling access to specific files and applications."
"The most valuable feature is that their database is completely encrypted and protected with multiple layers."
"Users can scale the solution."
"The password rotation and the session recording are the most valuable features."
"The solution is scalable."
"We've not had any issues with scalability. If an organization needs to expand, they can do so quite easily."
"The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward."
"The solution is very simple and straightforward to use."
"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."
"It is an easy-to-use and easy-to-configure product."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"The most valuable features of the solution include the endpoint navigation protection, the protection related to the EMS service, as well as the control and the cloud integration capabilities."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It took five minutes. I installed the solution myself."
"The price of the solution should improve."
"CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is not suitable for the current situation because when you compare it to OTP, OTP is the strongest password solution. You can use it as a one-time password, but you have to log into the password manager itself and if you don't change your password, it will be the weakest link in the security. In OTP, you don't have that weakest link."
"The solution is very expensive."
"We have had some major issues with the tool, but we have worked with the R&D teams and we have worked with support. There is room for improvement, especially on response times. But they're working on it and they're doing the best they can."
"CyberArk meets clients' need very spot-on. It covers everything customers ask for. As for improvements, honestly, the feedback's been really positive. I haven't heard any specific areas that need work."
"The solution can be complex to use at times."
"CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager can be better by making its UI more consistent."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to focus on how they can widen their area of scope by not just being an antivirus tool anymore. The shortcoming in the customization area of the tool needs improvement."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
"Its detection capability for certain attacks should be improved. It should have better and wider detection for certain malware attacks. It could also have some sort of RMN."
"It needs to improve the problems with the faster connection, and have a huge reduction in false positives."
"There needs to be more advanced analytics. It would make it a more powerful antivirus solution within the marketplace."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"Technical support is not the best. It's hard to get a hold of them if we need help. It's something that definitely needs improvement."
"Reporting system could be improved."
More CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is ranked 6th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 26 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 34th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is rated 8.0, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager writes "Offers integrated solutions and expands its capabilities through strategic acquisitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, CrowdStrike Falcon, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Tanium, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, Intercept X Endpoint and HP Wolf Security. See our CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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.