We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and One Identity Active Roles 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."Technical support has been very responsive in navigating challenges. It is very easy to open a ticket."
"We found the initial setup to be easy."
"It has helped from an auditing perspective identify who has access to privileged accounts."
"Performance-wise, it is excellent."
"It allows users to self-provision access to the accounts that they need."
"Increased our insight into how privileged accounts are being used and distributed within our footprint."
"The flexibility of integrating with other technologies is important because of a lot of applications - a lot of COTS products - are not supported when we are bringing the application IDs. The CyberArk platform provides a lot of opportunities to do customization."
"We are able to centrally manage credentials, touch applications, and rotate passwords."
"Another good feature is the change history. It's centralized in a single place and allows us to manage people's Active Directory domains from a central location. We can also drill down into individual objects in a troubleshooting or even an auditing situation. We can show evidence to auditors by drilling down into the individual history. It gives you all the history of what happened around an individual object. That is something that would be almost impossible to do in Active Directory, or extremely complicated."
"Instead of deleting accounts, we like the deprovision option so that we can reverse any accidental deletions. It also gives a higher level of quality control in terms of enforcing any number of variables, such as making sure that an account has a description entered before the account can be created. We can backtrack and know the history of it that way."
"The provisioning and deprovisioning saves a lot of time and skips a lot of errors."
"The biggest thing for us is Active Roles saves a lot of man-hours in keeping groups up-to-date manually or trying to write some sort of script that you have to run, so we don't have to reinvent the wheel. Instead of when every time somebody joins a department, then somebody has to remember to put in a request to add "meet user Joe" to this group, the solution does it automatically for us. Therefore, it saves our business and IT staff time because they do not have to process requests since Active Role can do it for them."
"The most valuable features include auditing, dynamic grouping, and creating dynamic groups based on AD attributes."
"It gives us attribute-level control and the AD management features work very well."
"In comparison to native Active Directory tools, using Active Roles for delegation is so much better. It uses an access template and that makes it easy to see who can access what. In fact, you can do that for many objects as well."
"Secure access is the most valuable feature."
"Many of the infrastructure folks who use the product dislike it because it complicates their workflow. They get a little less control, and they have to go through a specific solution. It proactively logs in for them, which obfuscates some of the issues that they may be troubleshooting."
"Over the past seven years, I have seen a lot of ups and downs with the product."
"The web interface has come a long way, but the PrivateArk client seems clunky and not intuitive. It could use an update to be brought up to speed with the usability of PVWA."
"There was a functionality of the solution that was missing. I had noticed it in Beyond Trust, but not in this solution. But, recently they have incorporated something similar."
"Initial setup is complex. Lots of architecture, lots of planning, and lots of education and training are needed."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager could improve the integration docking, it should have more layers. For example, integration with OpenShift."
"The current interface is not very intuitive."
"The solution needs better features for end users to manage their own whitelisting for API retrieval."
"I've had a difficult time getting it to cooperate with Azure in the cloud and, while the support staff are very good and very knowledgeable, what they assist with just on a call doesn't go deep enough to help with a number of issues. The answer that comes back is that we'd have to start an engagement with Professional Services, which is fine but that takes time to schedule and it takes budget."
"The third area for improvement, which is the weakest portion of ARS, is the workflow engine, which was introduced a few years ago. It's slow and not very intuitive to use, so I would like to see improvement there."
"For ActiveRoles, it would be good if the product supports multi-scripting language. You can use only VBScript."
"For the AAD management feature, it needs to improve the objects that we can manage and the security."
"The solution needs an attestation process that includes certification and recertification attestation."
"The initial setup was quite easy, but it was time-consuming. It took about three months."
"When doing a workflow, we would like a bit better feedback on the screen, as we're trying to get it to work. For example, there is a "Find" function that you need set up in a workflow to do some of the automation. It is not the easiest to get a result from those finds when you're trying to do that. In the MMC, they have a couple different types of workflows. In this particular case, we use their workflow functionality to find all of X within the environment, then if you find it, do X, Y, and Z. You can have multiple steps. When you do that search function within that workflow, it's really hard to find out, "Is my search working?" It would be nice if there was some feedback on the screen so you could see if your search is working properly within the workflow."
"It also has workflows and those are really powerful, but there are no built-in workflows. When it comes to them, it's empty. I would personally love for it to come with ten, 15, or 20 workflows where each achieves a certain task... I could just look at how each is done, clone them, copy them, modify them the way I want them, and be good to go. Right now we have to invent things from scratch."
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 One Identity Active Roles is ranked 5th in User Provisioning Software with 17 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while One Identity Active Roles is rated 8.6. 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 One Identity Active Roles writes "Single interface and workflows simplify AD and Azure AD management efficiency and security". 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 One Identity Active Roles is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, ManageEngine ADManager Plus, SailPoint IdentityIQ, One Identity Manager and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine). See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. One Identity Active Roles 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.