We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and NetWitness Platform 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."It is one of the best solutions in the market. Ever since I started using this solution, there has not been any compromise when it comes to our lab."
"I appreciate the ease of use for support analysts."
"We found the initial setup to be easy."
"It has helped from an auditing perspective identify who has access to privileged accounts."
"All of the features of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are valuable."
"Our go-to solution for securing against the pass the hash attack vector and auditing privileged account usage."
"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."
"The automatic rotation of credentials is probably the most useful feature."
"The most valuable features are the packet decoder, log decoder, and concentrator."
"I can have enterprise security, email security, next generation firewall security log, HIDS and NIDS logs, etc. all on the same dashboard. It makes it easy to pinpoint or correlate our server to this. I can find out if there is lateral movement. This is the biggest advantage of this solution."
"Possibility to investigate incidents based on logs and raw packets, such as extracting files sent over the network"
"It's quite economical compared to other solutions in the market."
"What we are mainly using are the RSA concentrator, RSA Decoder, Archiver, Broker, and Log Decoder."
"The development of use cases on the SSA console is quite user friendly. This means that the security analyst or the researcher does not have to learn another language."
"The most valuable features are its ingestion of logs and raising of alerts based on those logs."
"NetWitness Platform is valuable for creating rules that the solution must detect."
"It should be easy to use for non-technical people. Its interface can be a bit difficult. Some parts of its interface are not very intuitive. Some of the controls are hidden, and instead of having a screen with all the controls for that account on it, you have to use menus and other similar things."
"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."
"Report creation could be improved. The policies could be more customized."
"The support services could act faster when people reach out to resolve issues."
"Overall what I would really love to see is the third-party PAS reporter tool pulled more into the overall solution, ideally as its own deployable component service installation package."
"I don't know if "failed authentication" is a glitch or if that was an update... However, since we are the CyberArk support within our organization, we need to know that the password is suspended and we won't know that unless we have the ITA log up. So when a user calls and says, "Hey, I'm locked out of CyberArk, I can't get into CyberArk," we have to go through all of these other troubleshooting steps because the first thing we don't think of right now is, "The account is suspended." It doesn't say that anymore."
"It is web-based, but other competitors have apps. We need to get there. It is just smoother to have an app. You don't have all the bugs from having a browser, and people like them better, since you can get to them via mobile."
"The initial setup was a bit complex."
"The system looks like it is a mix of a bunch of different systems, and nothing looked like it was quite together."
"The initial setup was complex because it takes a lot of time to complete the implementation."
"The initial setup is complex. There are other solutions that are easier to implement."
"Its technical support could be better."
"Sometimes, it gives me static when integrating Windows-based systems. It should produce a precise log of sorts as to where the problem is. For example, a few days ago because of the McAfee application firewall, I couldn't get access to the particular Windows machine. So, my team and I had to figure out by ourselves that there was a virus responsible for the obstacle. This solution should trigger a meaningful log or message indicating the reason the user or implementer can't get into the machine."
"They should implement algorithms to digest that data and produce additional, more advanced reporting, alerting and support of internal security teams."
"The threat detection capability and centralizing and upgrading capability need to be improved. The threat alert capability needs to be improved as well because there is some lag time at present. They need to work on their database search too."
"It should have a monitoring feature. It would help us analyze the current state of attacks faster from a single platform."
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 NetWitness Platform is ranked 19th in Log Management with 36 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. 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 NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". 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 NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Microsoft Sentinel. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. NetWitness Platform 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.