We use it for other use cases, such as automating application authorization, managing files, and securing monetary accounts. We use it for managing privileged accounts.
I like everything about it. It's secure and reliable. I especially appreciate that it's locked down and only allows access to authorized components.
The issue is that in many environments, what I purchase via text is different. We have some policies that are specific to Microsoft environments. For example, my actual manager may not be able to connect to a Microsoft product due to a policy on it. The issue that comes to mind now is how six credentials are managed.
Currently, if you try to log in to any server within the environment, you would need to log in every time, regardless of whether you have already received the credential or if the connecting device is present or not. It is a problem with CyberArk. If CyberArk could find a way to solve this, it would greatly improve the experience.
I'm not sure if it is possible to fix this. It's not a point of entry, but it may require a longer string than the user might want to know, or maybe cheaper right now. If CyberArk can find a solution that improves the experience, it would be beneficial to customers.
Another thing is that there are some time needs that could be improved in the future. One thing that could be improved is to create of a better alternative for fixing group policy fees. We currently use Microsoft, but they have introduced new policies that may not be compatible.
I've been working with it for three years. I'm currently working with version 12 of the solution, and I've also worked with version 10 and partition 11.
The number of users is about 3,305, and it is stable. We don't have any small clients, mainly medium and enterprise businesses.
I would rate stability a ten out of ten, and it's very stable.
I would rate scalability an eight out of ten. It's not perfect, but it's fairly scalable.
Some things need improvement. The solution doesn't provide sufficient support. I contacted them at one point, but it took several months to get a response. Additionally, we had an issue with account balances that took a while to resolve. That was four or five years ago, though. Other than that, it's a decent solution.
Regarding the initial setup, I would say it's pretty straightforward on a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy. I'd give it a nine. Deployment took less than a week.
It is pretty pricey. I would rate it a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is very expensive.
Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.