We performed a comparison between IBM Security Secret Server and Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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."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."
"Stability-wise, I think it is a very good solution."
"The live recording is a very useful feature."
"One of the most valuable features is scalability, and how it allows you to scale it without affecting the underlying core components."
"As a PAM solution, Secret Server performs all the use cases in our environment."
"It will provide us with more security."
"The key benefits are we improve our governance. We ensure we can build more trust in the way we run and operate our environment, and most of all is the accountability."
"Transparent login for users of privileged IDs (Linux, Windows). This prevents sharing of the password because it is never seen."
"Stability is solid as a rock."
"It's easy to use and easy to configure."
"We can enforce complicated password policies and very important frequent password changes."
"One of the key things for us about the product is around its simplicity. Being able to put in the technology that allows the business to remove complexity and also allow the security improvements."
"For me, it is the robust API which is the most valuable feature. This allows for low maintenance costs and allows applications to automatically connect. This is great to automate security of the DevOps pipeline for shared secrets across environments. Also, being on Linux and a virtual appliance is great."
"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."
"The nonclustered index is working in an area with a problem that needs improvement."
"It would be preferable if the full proxy was included in the IBM Security Secret Server."
"The newer interface is more difficult to use than the previous one, and consequently, new users might need more training."
"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."
"The response time for support could be faster. Some features should be added: cloud-based, VPN-less, more secure, and it should be adjusted in a hybrid environment."
"I’m no fan of Java as an application front-end, as it tends to have issues depending on what browser one’s using."
"What I hope happens with the new product CA PAM is to keep all the useful features that exist in PA, but what I’ve noticed with many new products is the UI gets polished but systems lags stability and performance or it adds additional complexity instead of simplifying the user experience."
"They should include some assignments in the test environment to explore the product's features."
"Instead of just giving passwords to the user based on job function, from auditing perspective, turn that cycle around. That would really help from an auditing standpoint."
"We experience stability issues after every patch upgrade. This is a place where CA needs to improve drastically."
"An improvement for this solution is that it should not be constantly based on user name and password. There should be a condition to edit and update your username."
"The setup is complex."
More Symantec Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security Secret Server is ranked 13th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 4 reviews while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is ranked 18th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 3 reviews. IBM Security Secret Server is rated 8.2, while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Privileged Access Manager writes "Allows IT and consultants to access the infrastructure environment but needs more security and better support". IBM Security Secret Server is most compared with Delinea Secret Server, Delinea Privileged Access Service and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas Symantec Privileged Access Manager is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management, ARCON Privileged Access Management and Delinea Secret Server. See our IBM Security Secret Server vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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.