We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management and Sectona Privileged Access Management 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."100% compliant and you don't have to maintain ID management for each and every user."
"We use ARCON Privileged Access Management to monitor and record our admin users' activity."
"The most valuable feature of ARCON Privileged Access Management is the recording of sessions. It has all the basic features we need to fulfill our use case."
"The deployment process for the solution was easy...The solution's technical support team was good."
"The most valuable feature is it is easy to use and the interface is intuitive."
"The entire conversation that is happening between the servers and the client is recorded. It is a good feature if you want to do some analysis, and for investigation."
"The best part of this product is the administrator convenience. The portal is very user-friendly. An administrator can use it very easily."
"It was very easy for us to move this application and database from on-premise to cloud, as well as configure new things, such as load balancing. The product is very compatible."
"A key factor for my company is support, and Sectona Privileged Access Management has good support. Another valuable feature of Sectona Privileged Access Management is that it's easy to onboard."
"The most valuable features of Sectona Privileged Access Management include robust session monitoring for privileged users."
"The most valuable feature is the risk management. When a Privileged user performs a certain command, such as running a script, the system highlights it in the risk management section as high, critical, or medium risk."
"The most valuable feature of Sectona Privileged Access Management for protecting Privileged accounts is its built-in launcher. Additionally, the single sign-on capability is good. Sectona's session recording feature is particularly noteworthy because it utilizes minimal storage. Instead of recording entire sessions, it captures activity only when necessary, optimizing storage space."
"The usability should be expanded to other browsers like Chrome and Firefox."
"It would be helpful to have a "Favorites" list. For example, if I have 100 servers but I only go to 10 servers frequently, a Favorites list would allow me to go through those ten servers only."
"We would like to see support for privileged accounts used in web-based systems like Blue Coat Secure Web Gateway, VMware ESXI management tools, etc."
"The deployment process is a bit complex because no document is available."
"Hazard flow could be improved, the data compliance portion."
"It should support the SQL Always On platform with FQDN name instead of IP."
"This product is lacking in terms of dashboarding analytics and should have user behavior analytics. It should also have better dashboarding for executive management and security managers, which this product is missing."
"The solution lacks to offer a governance mechanism for operational technology assets."
"Sectona Privileged Access Management needs to improve its stability. It needs to enhance the product's stability because of frequent updates. This is crucial for a solution like Privileged Access Management, as organizations rely on stability. When it becomes unstable, it causes panic."
"Sectona needs to think about SaaS solutions and cloud use cases. For example, we need to be able to integrate Sectona PAM with next-generation applications such as Docker and Lambda, as well as ITD pipelines that use privileged user data."
"As I don't have at least one to two years of experience with Sectona Privileged Access Management, I cannot share areas for improvement in the solution. To me, Sectona Privileged Access Management has reasonable pricing, but it could still be improved. I'm also unsure if Sectona Privileged Access Management could cover the requirements of large-sized companies, but for small-sized to medium-sized companies, I'd recommend the solution."
"I would like to see future updates include robust support for cloud environments as organizations increasingly move towards cloud-based solutions."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sectona Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management is ranked 8th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 32 reviews while Sectona Privileged Access Management is ranked 17th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 4 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8, while Sectona Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management writes "Offers good session monitoring and recording features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sectona Privileged Access Management writes "Effective risk management, feature of recording all privileged user activities in a compressed format but limited SaaS capability". ARCON Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), ManageEngine PAM360, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and One Identity Manager, whereas Sectona Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. See our ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. Sectona Privileged Access Management 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.