Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ARCON Privileged Access Management vs One Identity Safeguard comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

ARCON Privileged Access Man...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
One Identity Safeguard
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (7th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of ARCON Privileged Access Management is 3.6%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Safeguard is 4.2%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

PRAVINKHISMATRAO - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced compliance and security through detailed action recordings
We have used ARCON Privileged Access Management for recording videos of user actions taken after logging into systems. Around thirty people, including network engineers, server engineers, and application engineers, use it in the company There hasn't been a notable financial benefit for our…
Tor Nordhagen - PeerSpot reviewer
Transparent mode for privileged sessions will greatly simplify our client's administrative situation
We're introducing the solution's transparent mode for privileged sessions. This is part of what the client hasn't used before. It will simplify their administrative situation greatly. So far, the rollout of this feature has been a seamless process, but we're still in the midst of rolling it out. The benefits will be on the risk side. Right now, the way accounts are managed, you don't necessarily know who is using an account. There's a shared admin account, and that's not a good thing. And those accounts are shared in wallets by several people. One of the real benefits of safeguarding here is that the client will have an absolute audit of who is using an administrative interface, whether it's server or network.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The video logs help us to identify any misuse of privileged accounts."
"With this log available, we can drill down to the activities performed by the people within our kiosk. There is a great feature where in the case of Unix servers, we have our own text-based logs. In the case of Window's server, we cannot create a text-based log, so our kiosk takes the screenshot or picture of the screen when I am working. It does this every three seconds."
"The notification alert feature where the network admin gets notified of probable malicious activity is the most valuable feature."
"Recording all videos of commands entered into devices is highly valuable."
"100% compliant and you don't have to maintain ID management for each and every user."
"It is recording video records for Windows and command-line reports for others, Linux and AIX, of whatever activities being carries by that particular administrator."
"The technical support is excellent."
"Session recording is the most valuable feature, as it covers compliance and it also covers our in-house applications."
"There are a lot of features, so it's going to sound funny, but one of the most simplistic features, the Favorites feature, is the one we like the best. You do a full run-through of configuration to check out a server and then you can save that whole configuration as a favorite. So the next time you go in, you click on the favorite that you configured and it automatically takes you to the end so you can check the server out that much faster. It saves a lot of time..."
"It's one of the best products we've seen. When you start looking at the functionality and use cases and usability of the product, it's straightforward. They designed this product with the end-user in mind, and they also had the sysadmin who is supporting the product in mind. They really did a nice job. Overall, it's a nice product to work with."
"The solution transparently integrates into the infrastructure and users do not notice it. I would give this feature the highest rating."
"The technical support is tremendous."
"I like Safeguard's snapshot feature that enables us to review the last time an application was opened and by whom. If there are any issues, we can look behind the scenes to see what has been done. We can suspend a user's access or close off a server."
"The most unique and valuable features are the upstream and downstream throughput capacities; the Safeguard platform provides agile integration. In actuality, all the features are valuable. They're good, user-friendly."
"We use the Approval Anywhere, or cloud assistant feature and it is great. It enables us to add an extra layer of security for critical passwords without adding time to the approval process."
"The transparent mode for privileged sessions is one of the best things for customers, because they don't see the system in-between."
 

Cons

"ARCON Privileged Access Management is not a user-friendly solution, and the application flow from one screen to another is very complex."
"Anti-bridging should be built into product."
"The solution needs more work on the password management side of things. Password management is a big challenge for us, and I would like to improve this aspect. We're finding that BeyondTrust is better in this regard, which is why we're probably going to migrate over. It will offer better security I think."
"A few areas for improvement in ARCON would be performance optimization, ensuring smoother management."
"For the in-house built applications, they need to provide good, solid access through their portal."
"The deployment process is a bit complex because no document is available."
"If an ID gets locked, the tool cannot unlock it, making it an area where improvements are required."
"We expect improvement in the dashboards to provide visibility of password compliance status, whenever a password is opened from the vault. Also, flexibility to customize the live dashboard."
"The interface is better now, but it still could be improved a lot. It needs more organization, menus, automatic refresh of information, and Web 2.0."
"I would like to see an adjustment with more enterprise architecture. You can buy multiple appliances but you can not fully separate different functions, so scaling might be a bit more complicated."
"Our experience with technical support has been disappointing. We require more prompt and faster response times. We require answers to our questions right away but we haven't received that level of support."
"I would like to see support for RDP over HTTPS so this product can be used in conjunction with the Microsoft terminal."
"We've had issues managing accounts and access to some data saved on the servers. Accounts are granted a new working certificate daily. We have an account to do it on APIs online and sync it with that. If the path changes at some point or someone changes the password, I don't know if it's from the Active Directory or what."
"We have issues using Safeguard to connect to and record from the cloud. Currently, they don't have a mechanism to record this type of connection."
"The deployment affects our privileged users because it takes a long time for them to request privileges, which impacts the SLA."
"I find it complicated to implement HTTPS monitoring because the documentation is unclear."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is available with competitive pricing. Licensing is not complex. We calculated the license requirements by counting the number of admins and the number of devices which were going to integrate with it."
"It is good value for our business. According to me, their competitors are more costly. Therefore, it is quite affordable. I find the ARCON to be much cheaper than the other products in the market."
"The cost of this product is very cheap, comparatively in the global market."
"I am not in a position to give any financials, but whatever we have paid, it is value for money. Their licensing model is good. They have been flexible for us."
"The product's pricing is good value. Go for user-based licensing, without any limit on the target servers."
"Pricing is low and licensing is flexible."
"There are no major concerns with licensing because we can handle multiple servers in our kiosk system."
"The licensing is simple, and there are only two types licensing: device licensing and user-based licensing."
"Its subscription cost is too much, and sometimes, it is very difficult to pitch the solution to the management for cost approval. If the cost is reduced a little bit, it would be easier. If its cost was less, many other organizations that currently cannot afford it would be able to use this technology. I'm sure many organizations around the globe are having issues with identity management, and it is a very difficult task for IT to manage privileged accounts."
"It is a bit on the pricey side, but you get what you pay for. You don't want to get anything too cheap because then you get cheap stuff and cheap support. That really never helps anybody."
"Setup cost, pricing and licensing are all very expensive."
"It was definitely cheaper than the other two products that we evaluated."
"We bought their other products, so it was not that expensive. It is one of those where the more you buy, the cheaper it is."
"The license is very expensive for us, partly due to inflation and partly because of the exchange rate between the Dollar and the Iranian Rial. We purchased a perpetual license that we've been using up until now, but I believe that we are not going to update it in the future. Instead, we plan to find another third-party to support us with the license, in the sense that we would have access to their license as a shared agreement."
"The pricing is about $80,000 per 100 servers. There are few elective costs."
"It is cheaper than CyberArk. Its price is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
58%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Retailer
3%
Computer Software Company
25%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with ARCON Privileged Access Management?
In terms of improvements, I suggest implementing password rotation for service-based accounts, as that should be included.
What do you like most about One Identity Safeguard?
The identity discovery is good, and the performance is pretty good value.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Safeguard?
One Identity Safeguard is expensive. The license is around $3,000 per month.
What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?
I find it complicated to implement HTTPS monitoring because the documentation is unclear. The disaster recovery process is complicated for me. For some configurations on the SPS side, if I need to ...
 

Also Known As

ARCON ARCOS, ARCON PAM
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RAK Bank, AXIS Bank, Reliance Capital, Kotak Life Insurance, MTS
Cavium
Find out what your peers are saying about ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. One Identity Safeguard and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.