2 out of 5.0, Reviewed Dec 1, 2016
Overall our experience was challenging. We previously implemented the password management tool and our end users are still calling into our services desk. We then implemented the certification module. The pre-work takes about one to two weeks to set up the review cycle. The connector with AD was a challenge as we were told the AD connector was out of the box. However, we had to code for the termination process to actually remove the groups. We are trying to install T-sync but we can't get beyond testing.
Know your business, know your workflows, document everything and absolutely have your house in order.
When the tool was implemented, certification module, it is pretty easy for our end users to use.
The amount of work involved to kick off a simple review cycle, labor intensive.
I wish Courion was honest with us in regards to their 'out of the box' solutions and i wish they were more of a partner with during this transformation.
We will start over. We will be sure to document our processes and be prepared to drive the implementation.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Nov 30, 2016
The overall experience has been good. We are working through change orders that will provide all of the functionality we would like for our enterprise.
Due lots of due diligence before selecting a solution and a vendor. Be sure you understand what you are getting and if it is really what you need and want.
One have one final module to roll out but the product appears to be meeting our needs.
Lots of custom configuration is needed. Not a very easy implementation.
More transparency in the SOW and how it aligns to our needs.
Implementation planning could have been better. If we could do it over I would want to consult with more implementaiton partners to understand what we were really getting and what the pros and cons could be.
3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Nov 30, 2016
gfThe sales team and engineers to provided the POC were excellent and took their time to know our company, struggles, and goals. They made us feel very important and they seemed extremely knowledgeable and were a strong factor in our decision to move forward with Core Security. We have struggled with the implementation. Having the implementation team involved in the initial creation of the SOW and LOE for the different modules and deliverables would have made our implementation much less troublesome. The implementaton team disagreed with the hours the sales team had sold for the deliverables. This resulted in budget and scheduling issues from the beginning and we struggled to get communicaiton or commitment from Core on these issues. It appeared that Core turned us over to the 3rd party implementation team and greatly reduced their involvment in our account. We were unable to get clear communication from Core regarding release dates, updates and deliverables. It appears there has been a large and consistent amount of turnover at Core which has caused a great lack of consistency and issues with the quality of their products. Releases have been delivered with glaring bugs that should have been caught with basic testing. Compliance Courier has been implemented and it has improved the access reviews but the UI is outdated, there is a lack of reports and the notifications are universal. It would be beneficial to to be able to customize for each review cycle. Core has eliminated functionality from AI since our SOW was signed, it is now very basic with limited functionality, very rigid and little focus on target systems beyond AD. ARM also has an outdated UI and also lacks flexibility. Approvers are people, not roles or groups, and assigned to each entitlemen
Insist on review of SOW by implementation team, understand company's commitment to meeting deliverables in SOW and fully understand roadmap for products.
Compliance Courier has greatly reduced the complexity and time to complete the access reviews.
UI's are outdated, products are not has flexible as they were presented.
Used internal resources for implementation, reduce turnover, have better internal support and communication for new customers during implementation.
Insist on review of SOW by implementation team, understand company's commitment to meeting deliverables in SOW and roadmap for products.
3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Nov 29, 2016
Specific engineer was knowledgeable and configured the product to our specifications while also following best practices. However, the tool is too complex and the amount of documentation is not enough for new IT staff to pick up and learn quickly.
Make sure you know how the tool works and how to configure it going forward.
Robust and capable of doing a lot of different things depending on the use case.
Simplified the configuration of the tools workflows.
Document the implementation even more from technical and functional perspectives.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Jun 15, 2016
Great customer relationship and commitment to meeting our requirements.
Look no further than Courion - Now Core Security.
A complete package.
It works really well.
Push us to less customization.
3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Dec 7, 2015
The Courion product required significant customization. This enabled adopting what features we needed, but also limited future growth as Courion changed their engagement model for implementation and maintenance (cut ties with a key third party vendor who) on us a few years after initial deployment. We've since had to re evaluate our solution, choosing to migrate to a new vendor and essentially reimplement.
The technology has significantly improved since we first implemented the Courion solution. It's hard to claim that the changes Courion made were something we should have seen coming, or that were predictable in some way. They really weren't, so there's not a lesson learned there. The biggest thing we learned from our implementation is get the data model for managing your access correct at the beginning, before you implement the technology. Take the time to translate the awful techno-garble entitlements into something everyone can understand (use "business description" as a custom field, etc.).
Customizable, but eventually brittle.
Utilize access request process, certification process and a custom built start-up and job-change process.
Courion was not utilized for support.
So, we had a pretty bad initial deployment that we did a "do over" on, so that's why this is neutral.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 12, 2015
Things were great until the acquisition by K1 Capital (just after software purchase)- since then people have left the company like rats off a sinking ship. Hoping to see a turn around soon.
Courion itself has been great, but go w/ 3rd party P.S., until the company stabilizes
The features - we're looking at implementing the entire product suite in phases over the next 2-3 years.
Not sold itself out
We would've gone w/Courion given the successful eval - wished we could've been further down the path before acq - as it's drastically slowing down our implementation, due to lack of Courion P.S. resources.
Great broad based capability
Acquisition by K1 has had a drastic negative impact
The acquisition has drastically impacted our rollout schedule - we're running a few months behind, due to courion implementation resource availability