Comply

CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla  is used across various sectors including financial services, mining, oil and gas environments, as well as manufacturing and SMBs that require access to specific sensitive environments.

The best features of CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla  include the hardening of the solution, which involves access to the vault being restricted to one way in and one way out.

The functionalities of CyberArk PAM include monitoring of activities, which are recorded live for auditing purposes, and it integrates into almost every environment seamlessly.

After implementing CyberArk IGA  Powered by Zilla, it puts the organization at a very high security level by reducing risk and threats to platforms. It helps protect the identity of individuals in the environment and simplifies auditing, making it straightforward for organizations pursuing ISO certifications.

Improvement suggestions for CyberArk include addressing the on-premises deployment processes, which require a very skilled engineer to handle because of the complexity of the environments involved.

I have been working with CyberArk from 2019 to 2024.

For larger environments using CyberArk IGA  Powered by Zilla, scalability depends on the integration environment being implemented and the skill set behind it.

PAM involves all identity management across whole departments. My most recent projects span across two to three months because they involve other stakeholders including senior network engineers to understand how the integration will proceed, which impacts the timeframes needed for implementation.

For the technical support of CyberArk, I rate them nine out of ten. While my experience from a partner perspective has been outstanding, the SLAs differ greatly from those of normal users.

I personally participated in the deployment of CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla and was the lead engineer on most of the projects that I have encountered.

I completed the implementation of CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla all in-house. Most things are out of the box, but understanding every environment remains essential for smooth integration.

My experience with the licensing cost shows that CyberArk is never reasonable on pricing. It goes per administrator user rather than per integrated environment, making it essential to manage access strictly.

Implementation for CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla is quite a complex procedure. My experience with the automation provided by CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla involves tweaking here and there, as the same device that will create security might also affect your performance.

In terms of automation, CyberArk places all your access points centrally, so if you are a network engineer wanting to access your devices, it is centralized for you, automating and orchestrating your access while placing security measures in place.

Regarding measurable improvements after starting to use CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla, this PAM solution does more than multi-factor authentication by providing additional layers of security through session recording and monitoring, which is critical compared to identity governance, which is mostly for authentication. I rate this product eight point five out of ten.

The main use cases for CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla  include onboarding users when they are being recruited, as well as managing the moving and exiting processes. When a user like James moves from department A to department B, the IT team no longer needs to manually change roles and permissions to the resources James has access to. Instead, the system automatically provisions James with the new role he has been appointed with. Similarly, when James leaves the organization, all his privileges and resources are automatically revoked without the need to search and manually remove each access point.

Users also want to have a single sign-on capability so they do not have to log into multiple applications. They can sign in once and have access to all their applications such as Outlook, Salesforce , CRM  solutions, and ERP  solutions without logging in individually. The system logs them in automatically to each application.

Additionally, CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla  helps users work from anywhere, regardless of their location or country. Users do not need to be in their office geo-location to access applications or resources, which provides flexibility for accessing applications wherever they are. Furthermore, if an account gets locked, users can reset their password themselves by answering security questions instead of going through the admin process for approval and re-enabling the account.

CyberArk has a plethora of solutions including PAM, IGA , Secrets Management, and Remote  Access. I personally participate in the deployment process.

The deployment time for CyberArk IGA  Powered by Zilla is based on the size of the organization, whether it is an enterprise organization or a small medium business. For an organization looking at 1,005 to 2,000 users, the process begins with a scoping phase where information is gathered from the customer, which typically takes two to three days for the customer to populate the documentation. After the customer submits the scoping documents, I and the customer review what they submitted. Once the review is complete, we conduct a kick-off meeting and provide the project timelines to both the customer project manager and our project manager. The entire process should fall within four to five weeks, approximately one month to one month and a week. During the fourth week, the system is fine-tuned. The fifth week involves training and user acceptance testing (UAT) with the customer to confirm that what was requested has been delivered as promised. After UAT, the solution is handed over to the customer.

The challenges I face with the implementation of CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla involve legacy applications and legacy systems, which sometimes present issues. Additionally, custom-built APIs that are not properly structured can be problematic, though CyberArk can help redefine them according to the customer's demands.

Integrating CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla with banking applications such as T24 is very tough to accomplish. When working with the T24 core banking application, the T24 support team is not able to assist much, so I have to find a way to fix the issue myself. The difficulty is not related to the price but rather to the technical integration challenges with these specialized banking systems.

I have worked with CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla for the past three years, and I have worked with PAM for six years.

The primary issue I have experienced with CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla is related to support. Getting the right support in the right jurisdiction is somewhat challenging. Although CyberArk has resource people to work with, the time to resolve issues is problematic. When I send a request, they respond, but getting an actual time slot to work with the customer to resolve the issue sometimes delays. Occasionally, the customer becomes frustrated and seeks support from us, and we experience issues with the first level of support they receive. I rate CyberArk support at a six out of ten.

I personally participate in the deployment process.

CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla is expensive compared to One Identity IGA and BeyondTrust.

CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla is expensive when compared to One Identity IGA and BeyondTrust. My overall review rating for this product is an eight out of ten.

My use cases for CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla  are identity and access management and governance, focusing on identities and identity governance.

CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla  is primarily known for managing privileged access identities, including all privileged users such as admins and system admins. It has a very good record in management of these identities, as well as password management and access to other applications.

The first downside is that the central admin console can be improved. Additionally, there is a need for more access to customization.

CyberArk IGA  Powered by Zilla is lacking in the governance side of identities compared to competitors. More risk management governance policies and features would be beneficial.

CyberArk IGA  Powered by Zilla is a very stable product, and I do not see a lot of issues with it most of the time. As long as you are maintaining the patches and upgrades in time, the vault, which is the main central component, is very good. If it is implemented or deployed correctly, it is very good.

CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla is quite scalable, and it would depend on a good architect who has done the implementation correctly. You could definitely scale up or scale down.

Maintenance has to be on your end. CyberArk will not do that unless you sign up for their support agreements. The type of support agreement or contract you have with them determines the level of support provided. They provide a lot of support resources such as a lab, discussion forums, and good documentation, which should cover most issues.

The quality of support is quite good. The type of support contract you have determines the response you receive. CyberArk probably has an SLA of within one business day for priority tickets. They have a good support team.

I have used a lot of other products in the market, and there are definitely better leaders in this space. Such products include SailPoint, Saviynt , and Ping One. Those products are better than CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla in some areas or overall.

The initial deployment of CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla is somewhere in the middle. CyberArk has a policy of having only certified individuals who are certified in the product working on deployments, so even though the person is new, they will be able to install this without any problems. However, it could be challenging if it is spread over a large installation or a complex architecture.

A team is needed who will go into the requirements, understand the infrastructure, and come up with a project plan for the implementation. At least two to three people should be on the team initially.

Any deployment takes time to mature, and CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla does provide benefits immediately in terms of quick adoption of finding out the privileged access identities by running through their crawler. Using crawler tools like DNA may help ease the effort quickly. However, some of the complex use cases will take time.

I am trying to compare CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla with other IGA solutions and grading them. It is definitely a very good product, but at the same time, the IGA may require some improvement in some areas, which is why I am ranking it to eight.

Customization involves making changes to fit customer requirements. Maintenance usually involves sometimes having issues with different connectors, mostly the Active Directory and LDAP connectors. Periodic aggregation of accounts and applications sometimes go through issues with firewalls. Sometimes they do not work, and you need to make sure your connectors are all in sync, especially your LDAP and AD connectors. Sometimes there could be some issues occurring between these two connectors, so there will be maintenance on that side, making sure they are working on a regular basis based on your monitoring plan. Taking backups regularly and periodic backups are essential.

Both the support rating and the overall product rating for CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla is eight out of ten. Eight means they have complete processes in place to help support, they have resources available, and there is a method to contact them and get response quickly. In that regard, eight is appropriate because they reuse some of their main PAM components which is very good, and compared to other products which I ranked around nine, they should be at eight.

We are a financial services company that's regulated by the FDIC, so we must complete a SOC 2 report showing evidence that we regularly review our high-risk applications.

The solution has been a lifesaver. It has given us a unified platform that allows us to easily demonstrate what we need to do regarding user access reviews for compliance.

Before Zilla, we were using fairly complicated spreadsheets, and it took a long time for the information security team to update these and send them to the business lines every quarter. We wanted something that was automated and easier for the business lines to review. Ultimately, it ended up saving the InfoSec team 60 hours per quarterly review and the business lines well over 100 hours.

We had these spreadsheets all over the place, but now we have a library of evidence to consult when needed. Zilla keeps everything in one place. It's not scattered all over anymore.

Because we must adhere to the SOC 2 framework, we need to manage our user permissions to the least privileged level. Since the spreadsheets were so complicated, many people rubber-stamped permissions. They weren't going to dive into this rat's nest, so they would just say everything is fine. With Zilla, people were able to see more clearly into their permissions, and I feel confident that we're drilling down and adhering to the least privileged rule.

The manual work needed to track everything on spreadsheets was becoming unsustainable as we added applications. We can import permissions directly into Zilla instead of juggling the data and massaging it so it fits into the spreadsheets. It's probably saved my team about 40 hours per quarter.

Zilla saves us money. We did some calculations during the first quarter and found that some people doing user access reviews were at the VP level, so their time is worth a ton of money. We also found that these folks were spending unnecessary time combing through these spreadsheets. Something that typically took an hour could be completed in 15 minutes with Zilla.

The interface is highly intuitive, and that helps in many ways because we don't need to explain things to the business lines. It's much easier than other identity and management tools. We were looking for something clear-cut that makes sense to non-technical people. It has greatly improved the controls on our audit procedures by giving people something that's clean and makes sense.

It's extremely important that Zilla provides us with a single pane of glass. When the FDIC asks us for a review, it's easier to have it in one portal than to go to all these spreadsheets scattered over SharePoint. Spreadsheets can also be manipulated, but Zilla has an audit trail that we can follow and show without a doubt that we've done what was required.

Maybe this is coming with their AI module, but I would like to see a feature that performs baseline analysis of permissions that may not fit into a role, and it attempts to group them into a role. We've run into problems with applications where someone has not created a role but assigned ad hoc permissions to a user. We still need to do some manual work to identify the group that the user belongs to. It would be amazing to have Zilla streamline that.

I have used Zilla for a year and a half.

Zilla is highly stable. We've had zero problems with it.

When we were using spreadsheets, we reviewed about eight applications, but since we added Zilla, we've scaled up to more than 40 and we continue to add to it quarterly.

I haven't needed support since the initial setup, but we have a monthly meeting with our customer success rep. We discuss our needs and upcoming features on the roadmap.

I have seven years of experience with SailPoint. It had the role-analysis feature and was a full-blown IAM solution, but we were looking for something we could use of the InfoSec team and GRC specifically that would enable us to do user access reviews. If I did an apples-to-apples comparison between Zilla and SailPoint regarding user access reviews, I would say Zilla comes out ahead for intuitiveness. It's easier to import permissions and it's simpler for non-technical people to use.

We use a tool called Saviynt that's run in-house by our identity access and management department. That also has user access management, but they hope to move away from it because support hasn't been great. Rather than wait for the IAM team, we decided to go for our own solution. While doing a deep dive into Saviynt, we came across Zilla. Our IAM team told us that if we wanted to switch, it would take only a week or two to get it set up.

Deploying Zilla was easier than I expected, based on my experience with SailPoint and Saviynt. With those, it was an arduous process. The initial deployment was short, but it took us a quarter to get the solution up to usability. It doesn't require much maintenance aside from regularly updating permissions. It's more administration than maintenance.

We received support from Zilla's team, which was very helpful.

The Zilla license is what we expect to pay for a product like this.

I rate Zilla Security nine out of 10. I recommend that new users follow the advice of their solution engineer. They knew what they were doing and guided us through the installation.