We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management and BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege 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."The deployment process for the solution was easy...The solution's technical support team was good."
"They don't just stick to a base version; instead, they actively enhance and improve it based on client feedback and industry trends."
"Video and audio logs are there for any activities that the privileged admin carries out."
"The notification alert feature where the network admin gets notified of probable malicious activity is the most valuable feature."
"With this log available, we can drill down to the activities performed by the people within our kiosk. There is a great feature where in the case of Unix servers, we have our own text-based logs. In the case of Window's server, we cannot create a text-based log, so our kiosk takes the screenshot or picture of the screen when I am working. It does this every three seconds."
"The video logs help us to identify any misuse of privileged accounts."
"The most valuable feature is it is easy to use and the interface is intuitive."
"It is recording video records for Windows and command-line reports for others, Linux and AIX, of whatever activities being carries by that particular administrator."
"The tool is easy to use and deploy. It has PAM capabilities like privilege access. The solution helps with the management of third parties and vendors. It is an effective solution compared to other alternatives."
"The privileged access management into sensitive systems is very valuable. That includes control from the endpoint all the way through to the managing of passwords and credentials that are used by the person to access the sensitive information. It's very useful, because nobody ever really maintains passwords for those endpoint systems. It's maintained in the Dropbox password file."
"I'm a BeyondTrust partner and I have multiple deployments, four or five banks right now. The features that give us quite an edge compared to what our competitors are offering - like IBM or Thycotic - are the Session Management, that is quite a big one; also the recording of keystrokes. In addition, there is the password vaulting and state-of-the-art Password Management, which I haven't seen in other products."
"The solution's least privilege enforcement has helped us ensure access is given to only the required people."
"It scales easily and the product is stable."
"The notable aspect is its ability to capture the application's behavior comprehensively and this thorough analysis is crucial for effective policy management."
"What I liked about this solution is that it can also integrate for tracking malicious use or sending analytics to a host that can process them. I don't know if CyberArk, Centrify, or Thycotic can do that. The analytics was something the client really wanted, and they already had BeyondTrust. It is very scalable. The agent on the workstation is very thin, and the processing power required on a server is nothing out of the ordinary. It is also very stable and easy to deploy."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"ARCON Privileged Access Management is not a user-friendly solution, and the application flow from one screen to another is very complex."
"Anti-bridging should be built into product."
"They they should focus on support. The support needs to be very strong. Since the product is becoming stronger, their support team also should be equally strong. They should respond to open queries within the time limit they have set. Their support team should be more technical, to understand the issue or the set up."
"It would be helpful to have a "Favorites" list. For example, if I have 100 servers but I only go to 10 servers frequently, a Favorites list would allow me to go through those ten servers only."
"The deployment process is a bit complex because no document is available."
"It should support the SQL Always On platform with FQDN name instead of IP."
"The usability should be expanded to other browsers like Chrome and Firefox."
"Hazard flow could be improved, the data compliance portion."
"Their technical support could be more responsive and helpful."
"The initial setup was very difficult. Even if you are an expert in EPM, it is still very difficult."
"It should support XWindows Remote Desktop Access protocol for Linux/Unix."
"It keeps on breaking every now and then. It is not yet mature. Every time something new comes up or we run into some new issues, the culprit is BeyondTrust because the agents and the adapter are not mature. The new development process goes on, and they're not able to handle things. It should be mature. It shouldn't break every now and then."
"The weaknesses are related to the effort required to migrate from existing technologies or having no Privilege Access Management (PAM) at all to adopting technologies like BeyondTrust. It involves changes in processes and can take a significant amount of time, typically six to twelve months."
"It only has limited support for Mac."
"What's bothering me, which is true of all of them, is that sometimes, the error codes that come up don't necessarily get reflected in the searches within their support sites or they're out of date. I would rather search by an error code than type in the text and search for it by text because the error code means that it is programmatic, and it is known. It might not be desired, but it at least is not unexpected. If you don't have an error code, you just get an anomalous error, and if it is lengthy, it can be difficult to search and find the specific instance you're looking for. This is something I would like all of them to improve. BeyondTrust, CyberArk, Centrify, and Thycotic could do some improvements in staying up to date and actually allowing you to search based on the product version. They are assuming that everybody is on their way to release. They put out a new release, but it is not reflected on the support site, which makes no sense to me, especially when they revamp all the error codes. They all have been guilty of this in some way."
"The deployment process should be clarified or made simpler. It would be helpful if the solution had in-app tutorials for users to look at as they progress through the system. Sometimes we get lost and need to go back to check what exactly the function was. There should be small hints around major key functions. It would go a long way in speeding up the deployment process."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management is ranked 8th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 32 reviews while BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 5th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 28 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8, while BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management writes "Offers good session monitoring and recording features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management writes "Admin rights can be granted and revoked within minutes and that is what everything comes down to, for us". ARCON Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), ManageEngine PAM360, WALLIX Bastion and Delinea Secret Server, whereas BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is most compared with CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege 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.