Users report that Keyfactor Command excels in envelope encryption with a score of 9.3, providing robust security for sensitive data, while Microsoft AD CS has a lower score in this area, indicating potential vulnerabilities in data protection.
Reviewers mention that Keyfactor Command's automation capabilities score 8.1, allowing for streamlined certificate operations, whereas Microsoft AD CS scores slightly lower at 7.3, which may lead to more manual processes and increased administrative overhead.
G2 users highlight Keyfactor Command's superior expiration monitoring feature, scoring 8.7, which helps organizations proactively manage certificate lifecycles, compared to Microsoft AD CS's score of 7.7, suggesting less effective monitoring capabilities.
Users on G2 appreciate Keyfactor Command's strong policy and role-based access controls with a score of 8.3, enhancing security and compliance, while Microsoft AD CS falls short with a score of 6.9, indicating potential challenges in managing user permissions effectively.
Reviewers say that Keyfactor Command's reporting and search functionalities are highly rated at 8.3, making it easier for users to generate insights and audits, whereas Microsoft AD CS's score of 7.6 suggests that its reporting features may not be as user-friendly or comprehensive.
Users report that Keyfactor Command's API/integrations score of 8.7 allows for seamless connectivity with other systems, enhancing overall functionality, while Microsoft AD CS, with a score of 8.8, still offers good integration options but may not match the flexibility and ease of use found in Keyfactor Command.
Pricing
Entry-Level Pricing
Keyfactor Command
CLAaaS
Contact Us
Deploy Keyfactor Command Certificate Lifecycle Automation as a Service (CLAaaS) and integrate it with your public, cloud-based, and private CAs.
With over 3 million reviews, we can provide the specific details that help you make an informed software buying decision for your business. Finding the right product is important, let us help.