We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Securonix Next-Gen SIEM 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."The biggest feature is the security of the overall solution. It's very secure. The vaulting technology and the number of security layers involved in the vault, where privileged accounts are actually stored, is the heart of the solution."
"It improves security in our company. We have more than 10,000 accounts that we manage in CyberArk. We use these accounts for SQLs, Windows Server, and Unix. Therefore, keeping these passwords up-to-date in another solution or software would be impossible. Now, we have some sort of a platform to manage passwords, distribute the inflow, and manage IT teams as well as making regular changes to it according to the internal security policies in our bank."
"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."
"We are able to rotate credentials and have privileged account access."
"The voice technology is very good."
"It allows users to self-provision access to the accounts that they need."
"This is a complete solution that can detect cyber attacks well."
"CyberArk has the ability to change the credentials on every platform."
"The customizability of the tool is valuable. We are able to customize the use cases and create them easily without a large amount of Securonix assistance. It's very flexible. We do not have to rely on Professional Services to modify or create a new use case."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is their analytics platform where they have the open security data-link, which they introduced. This is typically different from the other vendors."
"When we were looking for products for our security monitoring needs, our biggest requirement was that we wanted something based on machine-learning and analytics. If you go with rules, it can raise a lot of noise. Securonix, with its UEBA capability, had the best analytics use-cases."
"The two major features of this product we extensively use are the UEBA capability and the multi-tenant approach with the centralized data logs system. Customers are very happy with these features."
"The most valuable feature is what Securonix calls enrichment. Securonix is very powerful because of all the data it can process and automatically enrich. The actionable intelligence it provides is one of its benefits, due to the processing capacity it has."
"The detection of threats and reduction of false positive alarms as compared to other solutions are valuable features. It has improved threat detection response and reduced a lot of noise from false positives as compared to our previous SIEM solutions."
"I was looking for software as a service rather than having issues with managing hardware, upgrades, updates. I was trying to step away from that. Those were the key factors when looking at Securonix as a full-feature SIEM with next-generation capabilities available."
"The most valuable feature is that it works on user behavior and event rarities."
"The tool’s pricing and scalability can be better."
"Their post-sale support area requires a big improvement. Customers cannot automate tickets directly with CyberArk. They have to come through the distributor or bring in partners who have access to the support portal. Basically, the support for post-sales implementation is there, but the role of CyberArk is very minimal. Customers have to rely on partners, which sometimes creates issues. Some of the vendors help you during the implementation process, but the CyberArk support team does not do that. They have 24/7 support for our region, but they help only if there is an emergency or there is a problem with their system. If the password vault is down or the system is down, they provide immediate attention. For almost everything else, they take more time to respond. They give low priority to service-related or migration-related questions."
"The initial setup was a bit complex."
"New functionalities and discovered bugs take longer to patch. We would greatly appreciate quicker development of security patches and bug corrections."
"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."
"Sometimes the infrastructure team is hesitant to provide more resources."
"There is some stuff that we still have not fully integrated, which is our AIM solution. We are having all types of issues with it. I have been working with Level 3 support on it, but otherwise, from a functionality perspective, everything has been working except for the AIM solution."
"The current interface is not very intuitive."
"We would like to see better integration with other products."
"It seems to me that within Securonix there is no option for completely visualizing the types of sources or if there is any loss of logs. I've heard that they have an additional module to validate those types of cases, but in terms of the platform itself only, I can only see how often it sends data but not any specific detail."
"It takes too long to generate Spotter reports. For example, a 90-day report is around 100 megabytes. That takes a while, but a one-day report can be generated in a few seconds. We would be happy if they sped up the process."
"We have a lot of users who, because they're engineers and they're bringing down product data - where, at times, a top-level product could be 10,000 or 15,000 objects - it's difficult for us to determine what should be a concern and what shouldn't be a concern. We work with the Securonix folks to try to come up with better ways to identify that."
"Securonix implements risk scores based on different policies that are triggered. We've seen some challenges with the risk scores and how they trigger. These are things that Securonix has recognized and they've been working with us to help improve things."
"Sometimes, the injectors lag and are not loading. It would be nice if that could be improved."
"It could be improved a little bit more for admin users. There should be more administrative options related to security for admin users. For example, for forensic purposes, the admin should be able to stop a specific user from erasing some information. I would be helpful in certain situations, such as during an internal fraud."
"When they did upgrades or applied patches, sometimes, there was downtime, which required the backfill of data. There were times when we had to reach out and get a lot of things validated."
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 Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 7th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 27 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM 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 Securonix Next-Gen SIEM writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". 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 Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM and Rapid7 InsightIDR. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM 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.