We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Sectona Privileged Access Management 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."PSM (Privilege Session Manager."
"It is a scalable product."
"What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users."
"The regulation of accounts is by far the most needed and valuable part of the application."
"If any intruder gets inside, they would not be able to move around nor do lateral movements. It minimize any attack problems within our network."
"There are no issues with scalability. Our clients are very happy to use the product."
"The Password Upload Utility tool makes it easier when setting up a Safe that contains multiple accounts and has cut down the amount of time that it takes to complete the task."
"Ensures accounts are managed according to corporate policies."
"A key factor for my company is support, and Sectona Privileged Access Management has good support. Another valuable feature of Sectona Privileged Access Management is that it's easy to onboard."
"The most valuable features of Sectona Privileged Access Management include robust session monitoring for privileged users."
"The most valuable feature is the risk management. When a Privileged user performs a certain command, such as running a script, the system highlights it in the risk management section as high, critical, or medium risk."
"The most valuable feature of Sectona Privileged Access Management for protecting Privileged accounts is its built-in launcher. Additionally, the single sign-on capability is good. Sectona's session recording feature is particularly noteworthy because it utilizes minimal storage. Instead of recording entire sessions, it captures activity only when necessary, optimizing storage space."
"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."
"CyberArk has a lot on the privileged access side but they have to concentrate more on the application side as well."
"The solution needs better features for end users to manage their own whitelisting for API retrieval."
"It is easily customized, and that customization makes it very easy to start trying to shoehorn the solution into roles it was never intended to fill."
"Over the past seven years, I have seen a lot of ups and downs with the product."
"They need to provide better training for the System Integrator."
"I would like easier integrations for creating an online dashboard that executives would look at or are able to run reports from the tool."
"For users to access a system via CyberArk Privileged Session Manager, a universal connector needs to be coded in a language called AutoIT and its support for web browsers is so-so. Other products like Centrify have browser plugins that can help automate the process when using their products."
"I would like to see future updates include robust support for cloud environments as organizations increasingly move towards cloud-based solutions."
"Sectona needs to think about SaaS solutions and cloud use cases. For example, we need to be able to integrate Sectona PAM with next-generation applications such as Docker and Lambda, as well as ITD pipelines that use privileged user data."
"As I don't have at least one to two years of experience with Sectona Privileged Access Management, I cannot share areas for improvement in the solution. To me, Sectona Privileged Access Management has reasonable pricing, but it could still be improved. I'm also unsure if Sectona Privileged Access Management could cover the requirements of large-sized companies, but for small-sized to medium-sized companies, I'd recommend the solution."
"Sectona Privileged Access Management needs to improve its stability. It needs to enhance the product's stability because of frequent updates. This is crucial for a solution like Privileged Access Management, as organizations rely on stability. When it becomes unstable, it causes panic."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sectona Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Sectona Privileged Access Management is ranked 17th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 4 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Sectona Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8. 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 Sectona Privileged Access Management writes "Effective risk management, feature of recording all privileged user activities in a compressed format but limited SaaS capability". 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 Sectona Privileged Access Management is most compared with ARCON Privileged Access Management. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Sectona Privileged Access Management 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.
