For some organizations, Akeyless may introduce more vendor dependency and third-party risk than their risk profile allows.
Their cloud-native approach eliminates the cluster management that made HashiCorp Vault expensive to operate, and their Distributed Fragments Cryptography provides genuine security innovation.
But Akeyless is a SaaS platform that stores your secrets away from your environment. If you are evaluating an Akeyless alternative, the key question is whether you need some or all of your secrets to function independently of any third-party platform.
For many organizations, especially financial services firms with regulatory coverage, the answer will be yes.
If so, SplitSecure offers a practical Akeyless alternative for secrets management that splits secrets across devices you control so your credentials never touch our (or anyone else’s) servers without adding to your administrative burden.
Learn more about how SplitSecure’s architecture reduces your vendor dependency.
In this article, we reviewed Akeyless documentation, customer reviews, and technical architecture to show you when and why to consider choosing SplitSecure as an Akeyless alternative or addition.
Akeyless has built genuine innovation into their platform. Their Distributed Fragments Cryptography splits encryption keys into fragments distributed across multiple cloud providers and geographic regions.
The mathematical property ensures that holding 99% of fragments equals holding 0% of the key. Even if an attacker compromised most of Akeyless's infrastructure, they could not reconstruct customer keys.
The architecture works through a lightweight gateway deployed in your environment.
This gateway mediates between your applications and the Akeyless Vault Platform, handling authentication and secret retrieval without requiring you to manage complex cluster infrastructure.
Some reviews of Akeyless note documentation gaps and integration learning curves, particularly for third-party authentication systems. But compared to the operational burden of self-hosted alternatives, Akeyless represents a genuine improvement for many organizations.
Users on G2 and Gartner rate Akeyless highly (4.3 stars), and the platform integrates well with modern DevOps tooling.
So why would you want to use a different secrets management or PAM solution than Akeyless? The short answer is that using Akeyless means depending on Akeyless.
We explain the vendor dependency this creates below, as well as two other reasons you might want to use an alternative to Akeyless, either as an addition to Akeyless or as a replacement for Akeyless.
Akeyless markets themselves as "zero-knowledge," meaning they cannot access your secrets even if their systems are breached. Their DFC architecture does provide meaningful security benefits.
But "zero-knowledge" is not the same as "zero-dependency." Your operations still depend on Akeyless’ platform availability. Their gateway needs to communicate with their cloud services. If Akeyless experiences an outage, your secrets retrieval is affected.
In contrast, if SplitSecure ceased operations tomorrow, your deployments would still function.
For most applications, Akeyless’s uptime SLA is sufficient.
But for your highest-sensitivity accounts, like your AWS root credentials, domain admin accounts, or encryption keys, where any unavailability could mean catastrophic outcomes, some teams want secrets that function independently of any third-party platform.
DORA (the EU's Digital Operational Resilience Act) requires financial institutions to assess and manage risks posed by third-party ICT service providers. Article 28 specifically addresses concentration risk, requiring organizations to demonstrate that critical functions are not over-dependent on external vendors.
And NYDFS 23 NYCRR 500 now requires Class A companies to implement privileged access management and explicitly addresses third-party service provider risk.
For organizations in financial services, regulators increasingly expect the most critical credentials to remain independent of external platform availability.
With Akeyless, you can demonstrate strong cryptographic controls, but cryptographic operations still involve their infrastructure.
On G2 and AWS Marketplace, consistent criticism of Akeyless involves documentation gaps and UI challenges.
Reviews cite "poor documentation and unclear implementation guidelines," "navigation issues due to inadequate technical documentation," and a "steep learning curve for effective integration and setup."
A solution like SplitSecure is a fundamentally simpler alternative with almost no learning curve.
Instead of fragmenting keys across cloud regions managed by a vendor, SplitSecure distributes secrets across multiple devices you control. No single device ever persists the protected credentials.
An attacker would need to compromise multiple devices simultaneously (a “threshold”) to reconstruct a usable secret. This is a mathematical property of how the system works, so it is resistant to social engineering or account takeover.
Like Akeyless, SplitSecure has a very minimal infrastructural requirement.
There is no vault to manage, no gateway to configure, no cluster to monitor. The distributed architecture eliminates the single components that typically require dedicated expertise to operate and troubleshoot. When something goes wrong, there are fewer moving parts to diagnose.
Unlike Akeyless, SplitSecure leaves you with no extra vendor dependency.
SplitSecure has zero knowledge of your credentials, not because of clever cryptographic operations on our infrastructure, but because your secrets never leave your environment. A breach of SplitSecure does not expose your credentials.
And with SplitSecure, compliance is built into the architecture.
For organizations subject to DORA, NYDFS, PCI DSS 4.0, or SOX, you can demonstrate that critical credentials are not shared with any third party. Separation of duties is cryptographic, so when auditors ask whether a single compromised account could cause irreversible damage, the answer is: “architecturally no.”
Every access is logged because you cannot use the system without generating a record. This is not a feature you configure or a policy you enforce. It is how SplitSecure’s architecture works.
For many organizations, Akeyless will be the best fit solution when used alongside a solution like SplitSecure. For example, you might want to use Akeyless for DevOps- heavy environments while layering on SplitSecure for your break glass credentials, or secret storage for admin/infra accounts.
We break down some real-world use cases for Akeyless vs an alternative like SplitSecure below.
Akeyless’s integrations with GitHub Actions, Jenkins, Terraform, and Kubernetes make Akeyless well-suited for managing thousands of secrets flowing through automated pipelines. If your primary use case is machine-to-machine secrets for applications and services, Akeyless provides the right feature set.
These are the AWS root credentials that could delete your entire infrastructure, domain admin accounts with access to everything, and the encryption keys that cannot be rotated quickly if compromised.
SplitSecure is also worth considering for regulated industries where auditors need to see that critical credentials are independent of any third-party platform.
MSPs who need to access client infrastructure without holding client credentials find particular value in SplitSecure’s distributed model. A breach of the MSP does not become a breach of every client.
Use Akeyless for operational secrets flowing through pipelines. Use SplitSecure for the 10-20 accounts that represent your organization's single points of catastrophic failure. Akeyless and SplitSecure are not mutually exclusive.
If you are considering an Akeyless alternative (or Akeyless addition), you might have some core questions. We’ve listed some of them below.
Want to talk to a real person about when it makes sense to choose an Akeyless alternative? Contact us.
100% yes. See our blog for examples of companies compromised via credential management failures.
Credential compromise remains the leading attack vector across industries. The Change Healthcare breach started with a single compromised credential on a Citrix portal lacking MFA. The MOVEit breach compromised over 60 banks through one vulnerability.
The question is not whether you need privileged access controls, but how much complexity you should accept to implement them.
Akeyless fragments keys across their cloud infrastructure using Distributed Fragments Cryptography. SplitSecure distributes secrets across devices you control using Shamir Secret Sharing.
The key difference is that Akeyless involves their platform in cryptographic operations whereas SplitSecure keeps credentials entirely in your environment.
SplitSecure is designed for human access to the highest-sensitivity accounts, not machine-to-machine secrets in automated pipelines.
For pipeline secrets, solutions like Akeyless or HashiCorp Vault are typically more appropriate. Many organizations use both, i.e., Akeyless for pipeline secrets and SplitSecure for the accounts that represent catastrophic risk.
Every access generates a record automatically. This is not a logging feature you configure. Rather, it's how SplitSecure’s distributed architecture works.
With SplitSecure, you cannot reconstruct a secret without creating an audit trail. For SOX, PCI DSS 4.0, and similar frameworks that require access logging for privileged accounts, compliance is built into SplitSecure’s system.
See how SplitSecure protects your most sensitive accounts with distributed secrets that never leave your environment.
No vault infrastructure to manage. No vendor dependency to assess. A breach of our systems does not expose your credentials.
Our Blog
