Skip to main content
CyberArk logo

CyberArk Security Assessment

Security & Compliance

CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager enables organizations to enforce least privilege policies for business and administrative users, as well as control applications to reduce the attack surface without halting productivity. The solution helps organizations revoke everyday local administrator privileges from business users while elevating privileges when required by trusted applications. CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager also enables security teams to enforce granular least privilege policies for IT administrators, helping organizations effectively segregate duties on Windows servers. Complementing these privilege controls, the solution also delivers application controls, which are designed to manage and control which applications are permitted to run on endpoints and servers and prevent malicious applications from penetrating the environment.

Data: 7/8(88%)
HIGH Friction
SECURITY VERIFIED • SAASPOSTURE • JAN 2026
C
Top 50%
CyberArk logoCyberArk
SaaS Posture Assessment

9-Dimension Security Framework

Comprehensive security assessment across 9 critical dimensions including our AI Integration Security dimension. Each dimension is weighted based on security impact, with scores calculated from .
42
Overall Score
Weighted average across all dimensions
C
Security Grade
Top 50%
65% confidence

Identity & Access Management

D+
Score:0
Weight:33%
Grade:D+ (Below Avg)

Compliance & Certification

F
Score:0
Weight:19%
Grade:F (Critical)

AI Integration Security

NEW
A+
Score:0
Weight:12%
Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

API Security

B
Score:0
Weight:14%
Grade:B (Top 25%)

Infrastructure Security

D
Score:0
Weight:14%
Grade:D (Below Avg)

Data Protection

A+
Score:0
Weight:10%
Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Vulnerability Management

A+
Score:0
Weight:3%
Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Breach History

A+
Score:0
Weight:1%
Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Incident Response

A
Score:0
Weight:1%
Grade:A (Top 10%)
🤖

AI Integration Security Assessment (9th Dimension)

Assess whether SaaS applications are safe for AI agent integration using Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) standards. Identify Shadow AI risks before they become breaches and make safer AI tool decisions than your competitors.

Last updated: January 16, 2026 at 07:00 AM

Assessment Transparency

See exactly what data backs this security assessment

Data Coverage

7/8 security categories assessed

88%
complete
Identity & Access
Available
Compliance
Available
API Security
Available
Infrastructure
Available
Data Protection
Available
Vulnerability Mgmt
Available
Incident Response
Available
Breach History
Missing

Score based on 7 of 8 categories. Missing categories could not be assessed due to lack of public data or vendor restrictions.

Evaluation Friction

HIGH
Estimated: 4+ weeks
0% public documentation accessibility

Evaluation friction estimates how long it typically takes to fully evaluate this vendor's security practices, from initial contact to complete assessment.

31 data sources successful

Transparency indicators show data completeness and vendor accessibility

🤖

AI Integration Security

🔒 9th Dimension

Assess whether CyberArk is safe for AI agent integration. Identify Shadow AI risks before they become breaches using Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) standards.

🔌

AI Readiness

Infrastructure for AI integration

D
44/100
MCP Available
🔌 MCP Server50/100
👨‍💻 Developer Experience0/100
📚 Documentation80/100
Top Recommendation:
⚠️ Official MCP server not found. Best alternative: https://github.com/cyberark/conjur (Trust: 40/100)
🛡️

AI Security

Safety controls for AI agents

A+
78.2/100
TRUSTED_WITH_REVIEW
🔐 Authentication100%
🔒 Access Control100%
👁️ Observability65%
🔏 Data Privacy45%
✅ Excellent Security:
Dedicated 'Secure AI Agents APIs' for AI/bot-specific access patterns
⚠️ Needs Attention:
No token rotation
🛡️Unique Assessment: Evaluating AI agent integration safety helps you make safer AI tool decisions than your competitors

Essential Security Analysis

Based on available security assessment data

42
Security Score
C
Security Grade
0
Compliance Frameworks

Compliance & Certifications

0
Active
0
Pending
6
Not Certified

AI Integration Security Assessment

Industry-first assessment evaluating whether CyberArk is safe and ready for AI agent integration. Covers AI security controls and readiness infrastructure for Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP).

AI Integration Security

Industry-first assessment for AI agent safety

A+
GRADE
Top 5%
78.2
AI Security Score
🔐Authentication
100
🛡️Access Control
100
👁️Observability
65
🔒Data Privacy
45
📊Confidence Score
68%
TRUSTED_WITH_REVIEW

Excellent Security Features

  • Dedicated 'Secure AI Agents APIs' for AI/bot-specific access patterns
  • Zero Standing Privileges (ZSP) architecture for access control
  • Access Control Policies API for granular permission management

⚠️Security Gaps & Recommendations

  • No token rotation
  • No pii redaction
  • No training opt out
  • No data residency
  • No ai attribution
  • No rate limiting
  • No webhooks
  • 11/16 documentation URLs returned 'Unable to extract content' - likely bot protection blocking access
  • No rate limiting documentation found
  • No webhook/event notification documentation found
ℹ️

AI Integration Security evaluates whether CyberArk is safe for AI agent access. This assessment considers authentication strength, access controls, observability capabilities, and data privacy protections when APIs are accessed by AI systems like Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, or custom AI agents.

AI Readiness Assessment

Evaluates readiness for AI agent integration

D
GRADE
Below Avg
44.0
AI Readiness Score
🔌
MCP Server Availability(40% weight)

Official or community MCP server support

50
👨‍💻
Developer Experience(30% weight)

API docs, SDKs, code examples

0
📚
Documentation Quality(30% weight)

API reference, auth flows, error handling

80

MCP Server Available

community

CyberArk supports Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) for secure AI agent integration.

View MCP Server

💡Recommendations

  • ⚠️ Official MCP server not found. Best alternative: https://github.com/cyberark/conjur (Trust: 40/100)
  • ⚠️ ⚠️ Use with caution - review code before use
  • ⚠️ Limited AI capabilities - consider alternatives
📊Confidence Score
90%
🕐Last Verified
10/14/2025
ℹ️

AI Readiness measures whether CyberArkprovides the infrastructure and developer resources necessary for secure AI agent integration. High readiness indicates official MCP server support, comprehensive API documentation, and developer-friendly tools.

API Intelligence

Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for CyberArk.

API Intelligence

Incomplete

API intelligence structure found but no operations extracted. May require manual review.

Incomplete API Intelligence

Our automated extraction found API documentation but couldn't extract specific operations. This may require manual review or vendor assistance.

View Vendor Documentation

AI-Powered Stakeholder Decision Analysis

LLM-generated security perspectives tailored to CISO, CFO, CTO, and Legal stakeholder needs. All analysis is grounded in verified API data with zero fabrication.

Security Posture & Operational Capabilities

Comprehensive assessment of CyberArk's security posture, operational maturity, authentication capabilities, security automation APIs, and breach intelligence.

🏢

Operational Data Not Yet Assessed

We haven't collected operational maturity data for CyberArk yet.

🤖

Security Automation APIs

Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls

Compare with Alternatives

How does CyberArk stack up against similar applications in Security & Compliance? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.

Application
Score
Grade
AI 🤖
Action
44🏆
CN/AView
43
CN/AView
CyberArkCurrent
42
C78.2
35
D+N/AView
30
DN/AView
25
FN/AView
23
FN/AView
💡

Security Comparison Insight

5 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.