Fudo PAM vs One Identity Safeguard comparison

Fudo Security and One Identity are both solutions in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category. Fudo Security is ranked #25, while One Identity is ranked #3 with an average rating of 7.2. Fudo Security holds a 2.7% mindshare in PAM, compared to One Identity’s 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Fudo Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of One Identity users who would recommend it.

Fudo PAM

Read 5 Fudo PAM reviews

974 Views
592 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

One Identity Safeguard

Read 40 One Identity Safeguard reviews

3,212 Views
1,302 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Fudo PAM

One Identity Safeguard

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

```html

One Identity Safeguard and Fudo PAM are key competitors in the Privileged Access Management market. Fudo PAM is favored for its comprehensive features, which seem to provide greater value in complex environments.

Features: One Identity Safeguard provides robust session monitoring, an efficient workflow system, and competitive pricing. Fudo PAM offers advanced session recording, real-time analytics, and innovative security management features.

Room for Improvement: One Identity Safeguard requires better integration with IT systems, more detailed documentation, and enhancements in user interface. Fudo PAM needs improvements in documentation, training resources, and software stability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: One Identity Safeguard facilitates straightforward deployment with strong technical support. Fudo PAM involves a more complex deployment process but has responsive customer service.

Pricing and ROI: One Identity Safeguard is cost-effective with favorable ROI from lower setup costs. Fudo PAM, although more expensive initially, offers a higher long-term ROI due to its enhanced security features.

```

To learn more, read our detailed Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 823,875 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Fudo PAM

Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)

25th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

One Identity Safeguard

Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (6th)

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of Fudo PAM is 2.7%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Safeguard is 4.5%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Privileged Access Management (PAM)

Featured Reviews

Oleksiy-Zaionchkovskyy

Security Solutions Architect at Netwave

Easy to install but needs to provide better server management and organization

I would like to see better server management. You have to know exactly what you're looking for to get the right server. Working with 100 or 200 server installations is comfortable, but not thousands. The scalability isn't very good because it's complicated. I would like more organization. For instance, they could add a table that matches an account to many servers at once. There could also be better education services. They don't have any certification program, at least in Ukraine, so the training is complicated and divided into different pieces. Cisco, for example, has a great education program that starts from the basics and progresses to advanced features.

Read full review

Tor Nordhagen

Executive Director at Semaphore

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Session recording and password management are the two main aspects."

"Fudo PAM was the most flexible and intuitive interface out of all of the products in the PAM sector."

"it's perfect to control and administer computers in our company."

"We are convinced that Fudo PAM is better than competing products like WALLIX."

"The main benefit of the solution is that it's very easy to set up. It only takes a couple of hours to install everything."

"Safeguard has the ability to record and retrieve in the full-video format."

"We are able to log and get reporting on all privileged activity that is being performed. We like the fact that we can leverage the session recording feature, which is especially valuable when we're dealing with third-party vendors that have to remote into our our boxes and servers to do any work on behalf of the bank. Now, we can record everything they are doing to ensure that they're only doing the changes that were needed. In addition, we use it to leverage knowledge transfer with our internal staff."

"I like that One Identity Safeguard lets you configure the maximum number of connections to the target, a configuration I didn't find in its competitor."

"The most valuable feature of One Identity Safeguard is the user-friendly interface."

"We use the solution’s “transparent mode” feature for privileged sessions. It is very easy because it is only a simple configuration for our users. We don't have to modify our network. We install it, configure it, and it works. So, it is super easy. The rollout for our users is seamless."

"The technical support is tremendous."

"We deployed it into our company for controlling a client's behavior in our data center. It is very useful to control their connections, such as RDP."

"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."

More One Identity Safeguard pros

Cons

"I would like to see better server management. You have to know exactly what you're looking for to get the right server."

"Fudo PAM’s scalability is not very strong."

"The configuration is difficult."

"Professional training and certification would be great."

"The stability is not very good."

"Some of the out-of-the-box reporting isn't that rich. We spoke to our Safeguard reps who have acknowledged that some of the reporting features can certainly be improved and that we're not the only customer who has cited this. There are very little out-of-the-box reporting capabilities. You have to build the queries and the report. I believe in the next release they're going to be addressing this."

"Transparent mode was too cumbersome, so I don't foresee us being able to use it. On paper when we were initially talking about it, it was definitely going to be the preferred method until we realized the burden it would be on our network guys. Then, we had to step back and reevaluate what we wanted to do. That's when we changed our approach to use the RD Gateway feature."

"The automated change of the passwords, which is now integrated, could be improved to be more flexible regarding different systems."

"We have feature requests and would like to see the turnaround times on those features to be faster."

"We would like to be able to generate certificate signing requests (CSRs) from the interface for certificates."

"Cost-wise, it is a little bit expensive, which makes it difficult to get management approval. Its price should be reduced."

"The SPS could be a lot easier to administrate and the parts should be unified, from a design perspective, so that I can recognize the systems as being part of the same package. They feel like they have been forced together."

"The product uses a lot of resources in current sessions."

More One Identity Safeguard cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is great. We've been given discounts that make it cheaper than using any other solution."

"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."

"Setup cost, pricing and licensing are all very expensive."

"Safeguard is cheaper than CyberArk."

"The pricing is about $80,000 per 100 servers. There are few elective costs."

"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."

"One Identity Safeguard is expensive and the cost goes up as we scale."

"The license is around $3,000 per month."

"As compared to other products, it is reasonable, but the training sessions are too expensive."

More One Identity Safeguard pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

12%

Energy/Utilities Company

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

23%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Fudo PAM?

Session recording and password management are the two main aspects.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fudo PAM?

There are some areas for improvement in the Fudo PAM cake that we want to improve in terms of scaling. Scaling is an optional feature because we closed some big projects with enterprise customers f...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fudo PAM?

The main use case is for protecting privileged user access, such as securing remote access services. Another important use case is when we work with third-party users and need to provide password m...

See all answers

What do you like most about One Identity Safeguard?

The identity discovery is good, and the performance is pretty good value.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?

One Identity's support is not appropriately structured, and it has a lot of room to improve.

See all answers

Comparisons

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs Fudo PAM

Compared 25% of the time

WALLIX Bastion vs Fudo PAM

Compared 23% of the time

Teleport vs Fudo PAM

Compared 16% of the time

Delinea Secret Server vs Fudo PAM

Compared 13% of the time

ManageEngine PAM360 vs Fudo PAM

Compared 8% of the time

More Fudo PAM Competitors

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 37% of the time

WALLIX Bastion vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 14% of the time

Delinea Secret Server vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 10% of the time

BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 7% of the time

Saviynt vs One Identity Safeguard

Compared 5% of the time

More One Identity Safeguard Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Privileged Access Management (PAM)

December 2024

Download Fudo PAM product report

Buyer's Guide

One Identity Safeguard

November 2024

Download One Identity Safeguard product report

Also Known As

Fudo Privileged Access Management

No data available

Learn More

Fudo Security

One Identity

Overview

We are the leading vendor of innovative IT security solutions. We focus on privileged access management and privileged session monitoring, combined under the Fudo Security brand. The Fudo product line merges innovation and an intuitive user experience with strong security features. These are the hallmarks of the future designs of the company.

One Identity Safeguard manages and monitors privileged access, enhancing security with features like automatic session recording, real-time monitoring, and credential rotation. It integrates seamlessly, supports compliance with audit trails, and improves operational efficiency across organizations. This robust platform significantly bolsters security protocols while controlling sensitive operations.

Sample Customers

KFC, BP, Santander, Burger King, ING, Starbucks, Yahoo, DHL

Cavium

Buyer's Guide

Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

December 2024

Free Report: Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard

Find out what your peers are saying about Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Fudo PAM vs. One Identity Safeguard 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.