The product is not cheap, especially if you opt for an on-premise deployment requiring a complex server infrastructure. On the other hand, choosing the software as a service version simplifies infrastructure requirements but necessitates being online all the time.
In terms of general user feedback, the more security you put in front of a user, the more they complain. So usability and the user experience are always a challenge. So there's always room for improvement.
Security Consultant at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
2024-02-01T04:11:00Z
Feb 1, 2024
CyberArk Identity could improve by allowing federation directly or seamlessly, without the need for an Identity Connector. Instead of building separate Azure Connectors, if they could just federate, that would be nice. However, for this kind of feature to work, the customer's environment would need specific configurations. Basically, they could improve the federation capabilities to handle multiple domains separately, instead of just one. Right now, if you're working with one domain, it's okay. But for multiple domains, it becomes a bit complicated. In the on-premises version, you can curate more than one domain seamlessly. However, the SaaS version of CyberArk Identity requires more configuration. Moreover, CyberArk Identity is relatively new. They haven't been in the market for more than two or three years. They're still under development and not yet a fully-fledged product. They're constantly adding features, but they haven't yet achieved complete account management capabilities for all types of accounts, which is likely due to their competition. So, while they are actively promoting it, not many customers are using CyberArk Identity yet.
Obrela Group of Companies IT Manager & Security Integration Manager at Obrela
Real User
Top 10
2023-11-23T13:01:29Z
Nov 23, 2023
The solution's difficulty in gaining skill sets should be improved because it's a vertical product. We would expect a better and easier operational service from CyberArk Identity.
In terms of a governance platform, it's worth noting that CyberArk doesn't offer a particularly strong one. They struggle with identifying risk scores efficiently because their risk scoring relies on the manual entry of access data. In contrast, SailPoint excels in this aspect and can detect and provide superior governance scores more effectively. To be equitable, one notable aspect is that CyberArk is gradually moving away from on-premises components and migrating them to the cloud. However, from my perspective, they should consider retaining some on-premises components instead of entirely removing them. I understand that this decision might be related to cost and future prospects. Nonetheless, considering the global trend of securing and controlling data, offering everything solely in the cloud could become problematic for many organizations.
The tool has issues with the third-party SMS gateway. The solution has its own SMS gateway. Integration support is a challenge when we don’t use their SMS gateway. The tool also needs to improve its scalability.
Solution Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
2022-08-02T12:38:28Z
Aug 2, 2022
They could improve their UI and make everything more user-friendly. They're providing artificial intelligence and they're using the UBA. However, this part can be more effective.
This solution has MDM (Mobile Device Management) features, but they are weak. We would like to see an improvement in the ability to manage mobile devices. I think that there is a weak point in the Japanese market because they currently do not have a service person in Japan.
CyberArk Identity is a versatile identity management solution suitable for a wide range of enterprises. It is designed to enhance enterprise security and improve user experience. Its focus on security, compliance, and operational efficiency, combined with positive user feedback, makes it a strong contender in the identity management space.
CyberArk Identity offers a robust suite of features to manage user identities and access privileges. It focuses on securing access to...
At the moment CyberArk needs to enrich Conjur and it needs to be made more viable so that its adoption can be made much faster.
The product is not cheap, especially if you opt for an on-premise deployment requiring a complex server infrastructure. On the other hand, choosing the software as a service version simplifies infrastructure requirements but necessitates being online all the time.
In terms of general user feedback, the more security you put in front of a user, the more they complain. So usability and the user experience are always a challenge. So there's always room for improvement.
CyberArk Identity could improve by allowing federation directly or seamlessly, without the need for an Identity Connector. Instead of building separate Azure Connectors, if they could just federate, that would be nice. However, for this kind of feature to work, the customer's environment would need specific configurations. Basically, they could improve the federation capabilities to handle multiple domains separately, instead of just one. Right now, if you're working with one domain, it's okay. But for multiple domains, it becomes a bit complicated. In the on-premises version, you can curate more than one domain seamlessly. However, the SaaS version of CyberArk Identity requires more configuration. Moreover, CyberArk Identity is relatively new. They haven't been in the market for more than two or three years. They're still under development and not yet a fully-fledged product. They're constantly adding features, but they haven't yet achieved complete account management capabilities for all types of accounts, which is likely due to their competition. So, while they are actively promoting it, not many customers are using CyberArk Identity yet.
The solution's difficulty in gaining skill sets should be improved because it's a vertical product. We would expect a better and easier operational service from CyberArk Identity.
In terms of a governance platform, it's worth noting that CyberArk doesn't offer a particularly strong one. They struggle with identifying risk scores efficiently because their risk scoring relies on the manual entry of access data. In contrast, SailPoint excels in this aspect and can detect and provide superior governance scores more effectively. To be equitable, one notable aspect is that CyberArk is gradually moving away from on-premises components and migrating them to the cloud. However, from my perspective, they should consider retaining some on-premises components instead of entirely removing them. I understand that this decision might be related to cost and future prospects. Nonetheless, considering the global trend of securing and controlling data, offering everything solely in the cloud could become problematic for many organizations.
CyberArk Identity's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement.
The OpenID features could improve in CyberArk Identity.
The tool has issues with the third-party SMS gateway. The solution has its own SMS gateway. Integration support is a challenge when we don’t use their SMS gateway. The tool also needs to improve its scalability.
I'm not sure what needs improvement. It is a good platform.
They could improve their UI and make everything more user-friendly. They're providing artificial intelligence and they're using the UBA. However, this part can be more effective.
More integrations would be better.
CyberArk Identity could improve by having the ability to better manage the network, such as Cisco. There seem to be some issues in this area.
The user interface could be improved.
I don't have any feedback for ways Identity could improve — at least not for this use case.
The solution could be easier to use and I found it to be very complex involving many steps.
They can include the Mobile Device Management (MDM) feature.
This solution has MDM (Mobile Device Management) features, but they are weak. We would like to see an improvement in the ability to manage mobile devices. I think that there is a weak point in the Japanese market because they currently do not have a service person in Japan.