We performed a comparison between ARCON Privileged Access Management and Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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 most valuable feature of ARCON Privileged Access Management is the recording of sessions. It has all the basic features we need to fulfill our use case."
"The best part of this product is the administrator convenience. The portal is very user-friendly. An administrator can use it very easily."
"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."
"We use ARCON Privileged Access Management to monitor and record our admin users' activity."
"100% compliant and you don't have to maintain ID management for each and every user."
"Previously, we had to go through some effort to change the credentials of our devices. The process was subject to human error... For things like managing credentials, some kind of register had to be maintained. With the Password Vault of ARCON, all these processes are automated. The credentials are changed, as per the schedule. The information is encrypted, kept in our vault, and sent to all the email addresses within the ARCON solution itself."
"Video and audio logs are there for any activities that the privileged admin carries out."
"They don't just stick to a base version; instead, they actively enhance and improve it based on client feedback and industry trends."
"We have received good support from the tech support team."
"It will provide us with more security."
"The key benefits are we improve our governance. We ensure we can build more trust in the way we run and operate our environment, and most of all is the accountability."
"The interface is very friendly, colorful, and bold."
"We know we can scale up with what we have, and we probably will not need to buy any further appliances down the road."
"The product is very scalable in terms of concurrent sessions that it can handle at a time, number of device it can support, accounts that it can manage, or number of nodes that you can deploy in a cluster."
"It is great for identity governance."
"It's easy to use and easy to configure."
"The solution lacks to offer a governance mechanism for operational technology assets."
"They need to support all web browsers. At the moment it only supports Explorer, IE. They have to come up with a solution to support all browsers."
"For the in-house built applications, they need to provide good, solid access through their portal."
"If you take Microsoft hypervisor - which comes with its own interface, its own web layer, etc. - something like that also requires privileged IDs. As per our institution policy now, everything has to come through ARCON. We have demanded that these kind of advanced features also should be there."
"If an ID gets locked, the tool cannot unlock it, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The solution needs more work on the password management side of things. Password management is a big challenge for us, and I would like to improve this aspect. We're finding that BeyondTrust is better in this regard, which is why we're probably going to migrate over. It will offer better security I think."
"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."
"Sometimes it gets stuck between servers and I would like to see this improved in the future."
"The setup is complex."
"We have to do a lot of manual work to automate features."
"The service account management functionality needs to be extended to application pools, SQL database, PowerShell scripts, service account discovery, etc."
"The management console could be improved."
"It'd be great if you just stuck in your PIV card and Windows popped up, asked you for your password. You typed it in, then it remembered your credentials."
"They should include some assignments in the test environment to explore the product's features."
"I would like this solution to be simpler. It should have a one-click access that works together with AWS."
"It's difficult to locate the reports, there are limits on what reports can be run from the GUI, and the report formats are lacking."
More ARCON Privileged Access Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
ARCON Privileged Access Management is ranked 8th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 32 reviews while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is ranked 18th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 50 reviews. ARCON Privileged Access Management is rated 7.8, while Symantec Privileged Access Manager is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ARCON Privileged Access Management writes "Offers good session monitoring and recording features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Privileged Access Manager writes "Allows IT and consultants to access the infrastructure environment but needs more security and better support". ARCON Privileged Access Management is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), ManageEngine PAM360, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and senhasegura Session Management, whereas Symantec Privileged Access Manager is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and Delinea Secret Server. See our ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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.
