We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiSandbox 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."Rather than multiple tools for maintaining regulatory compliance around passwords and privileged accounts, we have centralized as much as possible with CyberArk. This is now a one stop shop for end users to access their elevated credentials."
"Our go-to solution for securing against the pass the hash attack vector and auditing privileged account usage."
"The most valuable features of the solution are control and analytics."
"The most important feature is managing the credentials and implementing those policies which rotate the credentials. Session Manager is also key in not letting the users have access to those credentials. Instead, CyberArk actually manages everything by itself."
"Allows secure, logged access to highly sensitive servers and services."
"It is a scalable product."
"CyberArk has allowed us to get the credentials and passwords out of hard-coded property files."
"With CyberArk, you can be fully confident that your existing accounts are secure. You will be 100 percent"
"What I find most valuable, is that it is easy to use."
"One of the valuable features is its ability to detect new threats."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox is scalable."
"Overall, it works fine. Its interface is also fine."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature was the EDR, endpoint detection and response."
"The scanner office document as well as PDF are useful. The most valuable thing is that you can emulate different operating systems without having the danger of getting something infected. It emulates several operating systems, and as a result, you either get the file or you don't get the file."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The initial setup has room for improvement to be more straightforward."
"The current interface doesn't scale that well, and has some screens still in the old layout."
"Their post-sale support area requires a big improvement. Customers cannot automate tickets directly with CyberArk. They have to come through the distributor or bring in partners who have access to the support portal. Basically, the support for post-sales implementation is there, but the role of CyberArk is very minimal. Customers have to rely on partners, which sometimes creates issues. Some of the vendors help you during the implementation process, but the CyberArk support team does not do that. They have 24/7 support for our region, but they help only if there is an emergency or there is a problem with their system. If the password vault is down or the system is down, they provide immediate attention. For almost everything else, they take more time to respond. They give low priority to service-related or migration-related questions."
"The solution needs better features for end users to manage their own whitelisting for API retrieval."
"The tool’s pricing and scalability can be better."
"Stability is a huge concern right now. We are on a version which is very unstable. We have to upgrade to stabilize it. It is fine, but the problem is we have to hire CyberArk to do the upgrade. This costs money, and it is their bug."
"We had an issue with the Copy feature... Apparently, in version 10, that Copy feature does not work. You actually have to click Show and then copy the password from within Show and then paste it. We've had a million tickets and we had to figure out a workaround to it."
"It's a big program. To scale excessively, locally, on an on-prem application, takes a lot of servers."
"The licensing can be very confusing. It needs to be simplified."
"The product is good but it could be speedier. In addition, it's quite complex."
"Something that needs to improve, is the end-point protection."
"In general, maybe they are not updated to cover risks."
"The initial setup is not too complex but could be easier."
"If you were to compare prices between vendors and manufacturers, you would see that the lowest equipment in the Sandbox line is quite expensive for a new customer."
"The area I would like this solution to be improved in is the integrations for Sandbox with AI and big data ML mechanisms. I think this would be a practical improvement."
"In future releases, I would like to see more automation capabilities."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Fortinet FortiSandbox is ranked 5th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 36 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.2. 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 Fortinet FortiSandbox writes "Light and powerful solution design; useful to have". 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 Fortinet FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Trellix Network Detection and Response, Check Point SandBlast Network, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and Fortinet FortiEDR. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Fortinet FortiSandbox 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.