We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and Trend Micro Deep Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."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."
"Logs that get collected on the Privilege Management console from the agents are very good. They help us to identify the aspects from which we have to whitelist an application."
"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."
"One of the valuable features is the absence of any local user in a unique system. All users are defined in the AD; communication is only between Unix and AD."
"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."
"Technical support is good."
"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."
"It's relatively straightforward to set up, especially if you are deploying to the cloud."
"The solution has a low footprint and does not have a lot of impact on the host."
"This product offers good protection against many types of malware."
"There are compliance issues for legacy applications and after applying OS security patches. The product's HIPS (Host Intrusion Prevention System) modules do the job for you automatically, without any downtime."
"It's easy to use and the interface is simple."
"The vulnerability scanning reduces false positives by quite a bit."
"There's useful monitoring on offer."
"Signatures are frequently updated."
"For server security purposes, I like the product's firewall."
"The program updates are very rare and the frequency is too far apart to take care of bug fixes and adding the latest features."
"They are doing good for now, but they should start to consider tight integration with Mac solutions. There should be more integration with Mac. There should be Active Directory (AD) Bridging. Thycotic and Centrify have it currently because they merged and joined forces, and it was a feature available in Centrify. So, basically, they joined forces to create a kind of perfect product. If you have a hybrid or mixed environment with Windows and Mac, your Active Directory can only manage or enforce policies on Windows, but what about your Mac devices? How do you control them? So, AD Bridging will act as a bridge to bring all your Mac devices into your Active Directory. This way you have full control over your entire environment."
"There is room for improvement in having the solution align more with standards. We're always shoehorning the product into the standards. It's not that it doesn't work for standards, it does. But Quick Start Policies are pretty close to what we need. The vendor needs to keep looking at GDPR, 27001, and 27701. That's why our clients buy the product."
"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."
"How the accounts are presented in the solution's UI can be improved."
"They need to come up with better integrative options which should be customer-centric."
"There are three types of endpoints. If we need to use them in the solution, then we need to purchase the licenses separately. The tool needs to improve its licensing."
"The other area to improve is that they rely on MS SQL servers only. You cannot have any other database behind them. They have to be on MS SQL. If they can do something about these issues, this would be a better alternative for some customers."
"There should be more tools to trace back. Some sort of module needs to be included to attach all the things. It should be more stable, and the traceback feature should be improved. There were cases when we got virtual analyzer or CMC errors. We got false-positive malware notifications, but we couldn't trace them. I raised a case with Trend Micro two or three times, but they couldn't resolve it. Their support should be improved in terms of technical abilities to troubleshoot complex issues. They should be more knowledgeable."
"The solution could use more integration."
"The licensing structure could improve."
"If I had more reporting, the product would be an A plus."
"Pricing is on the expensive side and could be more affordable. The technical support for Trend Micro Deep Security also needs improvement."
"Their automation needs improvement."
"A minor issue in Trend Micro Deep Security is that once the tool is upgraded, it shows some machines as offline or not reported while showing a recent update as outdated. The tool has some server connection issues."
"What this product lacks at this stage is the ability to have automated workbooks to do the response. At this stage, the response is more manual, and it is not automated. If there is a response functionality in Deep Security, similar to what we have in EDR these days, to automatically respond to some of the threats, it would be cool. So, we'd like to have an automated response. There should be a response functionality."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 5th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 28 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 81 reviews. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Deep Security writes "High availability, effective VPM, and responsive support". 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 ARCON Privileged Access Management, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security.
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.
