CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Reviews

We are using CyberArk to store credentials of privileged assets in a secure way. In addition, CyberArk helps us to meet our security policy effortlessly, defining the complexity of the passwords, rotation period, etc.

We are also using the Privileged Session Manager to provide remote access to servers with security controls in place (session isolated and recorded).

With CyberArk, we can meet our compliance requirements reducing security risks without introducing additional operational complexity. This is very valuable for our company because we have regular audits where we have to provide evidence about the use of our privileged accounts (password use, password rotation, etc.)

In addition, we have several third parties that need access to our infrastructure. CyberArk PAS helps us to provide this access in a quick and secure way.

• Master policy: allows us to establish a security baseline for our privileged accounts.
• CPM: allows us to rotate passwords following the policy defined.
• PSM: allows us to provide isolated sessions to the customer with additional controls (real-time monitoring, session isolation, and session recording).

• We would like to have more flexibility in the RBAC model and have more options to define who should have access to what, not only based on safe membership. 
• In addition, the user interface could be improved. When a team manages thousands of accounts, advanced filters are very valuable to search the accounts.

There are threats that get opened because of the vulnerability of privileged access that says to directly put it in a vault.

Every aspect of the solution is very well integrated, and that gives comfort. It is a fail-safe kind of environment. I think that's the fail-safe feature makes customers comfortable because there are no non-integrable stuff or cures. For example, a vault would have its own anti-virus,  its own application, its own operating system to stay hardened. It is absolutely hardened for it to be protected from the outside world.

Having a cloud version would be very helpful. You have to invest a lot of money for the infrastructure hardware so the cloud version would help.

My organization has been using this solution for a few years but I joined the company three months back.

It is very stable.

Our clients are large enterprises. It is easy to scale.

Our customers contact us for any technical support, but we are able to sort out customer issues to a very large extent. We only had to connect with CyberArk at L-3 level or L-4 level. We are able to address most of our customer's issues. 

I would rate their support a nine out of ten. 

We have had customers use a competitive product that CyberArk has replaced but it is not very common. It is not very easy to change your Privileged Access Management framework so easily.

CyberArk is fail-safe, it has a threat intelligence filter, and prevention threat attacks. That sets the product apart from others, and I think the other part is their ability to onboard a maximum number of resources like storage network, security, IoT devices, and RPAs. Its ability to pervasively onboard almost all critical privileges and resources across the organization is where it stands out in a really big way.

I didn't implement it. I don't believe we've had any problems implementing it. I've never heard any issues. I'd say it's neutral.

There are costs in addition to the standard licensing. There is an implementation fee. Those are additional fees and the customer has the annual maintenance, the software, and whole maintenance cost added to that. So there are additional costs besides this standard license.

The most important phase is the discovery phase. Pay the most attention to that. Spend the most amount of time on the discovery phase, which is really the startup planning. The project becomes smoother. Book stricter guidelines on timelines and let there be a senior sponsor part of the project so that you are able to get milestones addressed quickly otherwise, these projects tend to drag longer.

In the next release, I would like to have the cloud option and all of the features that come with it. 

I would rate CyberArk a nine out of ten. 

We use CyberArk to manage anything privileged including our admin IDs, AWS root credentials, service accounts, etc.

It's been a big win for us as we're now able to start managing service accounts with AIM. This is a big win, especially with our web hosting team.

There are several features we've found valuable. We're auto-discovering our new Windows servers, we're managing root in our Unix environment, and now we're pushing for SA password rotation this year.

As we have not yet moved to the core licensing model, we don't have the benefit of PSM and a few other things that were not previously included.

Privileged account access into customer environments.

A higher level of password rotation and usage auditing.

• OTP
• Session recording
• Auditing
• It takes away all ambiguity around "known" admin accounts.

The native PSM components are really good, however, if you have to apply environmental tweaks to an application launch, custom AutoIt scripts are needed. 

Options for specifying drive mappings or script execution without the need for AutoIt based scripting in the native components would be good.

Primary use case: having privileged access management and ingress into customer networks and infrastructure.

The auditing and recording functionality along with stringent password-change policies and one-time password use has made compliance with customer requirements a much clearer and easily managed process.

• Recordings
• Exclusive use, and 
• OTP. 

There can be no ambiguity: An account can only be in use by one single known user, and they have no knowledge of the password.

Functionality to enable drive mappings to platforms and default connectors without the need to use AutoIt.

The product enables us manage passwords of highly privileged (service) accounts. These are not tied to a person, and they include a full audit trail and approval workflow functionality.

Management of these accounts is typically required to prevent abuse and gain control of this.

Perhaps improve the user registry integration. It is already fine, but a bit atypical.

My experience with the product was with older versions, so this may not represent the actual case anymore. In essence, user registry integration is atypical in the sense that the product creates a copy of the user inside the product itself (to accommodate for license seat counting, I guess).

Depending upon the size of the user base and license model, it may not allow new users to log in to the platform. I doubt the vendor considers this an issue, though.

I have used this for three years, including the implementation of the product

There were no issues with stability.

There were no issues with scalability.

Technical support is OK. The product is not very difficult to install, but there are some considerations that need to be taken into account. Tech support is very well aware of this.

The initial setup was simple. It is windows based and leverages installation wizards to perform installation. Also, sufficient documentation exists to guide the setup procedure.

Look well at the user base and frequency of use. A lot of licensing models exist, but having this clear will immediately indicate what fits best.

As for pricing, I cannot comment.

We did not evaluate other solutions.

Make sure that the organization is ready and willing to adopt this, as the typical business cases cannot be addressed by the product alone.

Its features like detailed audit and reporting, automated workflows, granulated privileged access controls, automated password rotation, and centralized and secure storage have helped us in developing a secure environment for customers, along with audit and compliance coverage.

Enterprise Password Vault, Privilege Session Manager, and Application Identity Management have been very useful for our client environment.

Performance of PIM could be better and intended for usability as well as security. Another point is that the free trials should be in place for all components so that PoC could be made easy.

No.

No.

Technical support is quite efficient and they always provide a timely response.

Haven’t use any solution prior to CyberArk.

As this was new product, there were some small challenges in understanding but the setup was straightforward.

As our deployment was not so large, our client was happy with the pricing and licensing.

Yes, we did a research and chose CyberArk above all due to its components that were suitable to our environment.

Proper implementation and prior study of product will give you efficient results. Organizations looking for a product that can provide proper paper trail for risk and compliance audits should certainly give it a try because the product's auditing and reporting capabilities are really bliss.

• Ability to manage passwords for highly privileged, service accounts, which are not tied to a person
• The inclusion of a full audit trail
• Approval workflow functionality

Management of these accounts is typically required to prevent abuse and prove compliance.

Perhaps improve the user registry integration. User registry integration is atypical in the sense that the product creates a copy of the user inside the product itself. This is done to accommodate for license seat counting.

Depending upon the size of the user base and license model, it may not allow new users to log in to the platform. I doubt that the vendor considers this an issue.

I have used CyberArk for three years, including the implementation of the product.

I did not have stability issues.

I did not have scalability issues.

The product is not very difficult to install. However, there are some considerations that need to be taken into account. Technical support is very well aware of this.

The setup was simple. It is Windows based and leverages installation wizards to perform the installation. Also, sufficient documentation exists to guide you through the setup procedure.

Examine the user base and frequency of use. A lot of licensing models exist. However, having this clear will immediately indicate what fits best. As for pricing, I cannot comment.

We didn’t look at alternatives.

Assure that the organization is ready and willing to adopt this. The typical business cases cannot be addressed by the product alone.