We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID and Symantec Siteminder based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the single sign-on, which allows any application that is SAML or OAuth compatible to use Azure as an identity provider for seamless sign-in."
"The most valuable feature is the conditional access policies. This gives us the ability to restrict who can access which applications or the portal in specific ways."
"The ability to speed up ability is an asset."
"My two preferred features are conditional access and privileged identity management."
"It has been very instrumental towards a lot of services we run, especially on the single sign-on side. For example, we have 160 countries that all run their own IT but we still are able to provide users with a single sign-on experience towards global applications. So, they have a certain set of accounts that they get from their local IT department, then they use exactly the same account and credentials to sign into global services. For the user, it has been quite instrumental in that space. It is about efficiency, but also about users not having to remember multiple accounts and passwords since it is all single sign-on. Therefore, the single sign-on experience for us has been the most instrumental for the end user experience."
"The tool's most valuable features are security and integration with other tenants."
"The self-password reset if it's enabled and configured properly, really helps a company be able to reset rather than getting IT involved."
"Coming from a traditional on-premises Active Directory infrastructure, it is purely a SaaS platform. It is global. It is evergreen. It is always evolving. It is core to the Microsoft Ecosystem."
"It's quite scalable."
"It has considerably reduced the amount of time that new users would take to join into the organization. Previously, it was a lengthy, manual process because it's a very secure environment, where they need to verify the user before they can actually grant him a user-ID and password. Integrating with the built-in custom application, and exposing CA Single Sign On to the internet, we were able to get the employees onboard. The time that we gained was: previously it would generally take from four to eight weeks for each employee, we brought it to one to two days."
"The Directory is secure. It's our user store, and it's important to keep our members safe. The product does well with that."
"It's agent-based. It's convenient to deploy and integrate."
"The most valuable feature is that it meets the requirements of the customer. You have a lot of features in the product. Every product has them, but the question is, are these products going to meet the requirement of the customer?"
"If you look at our organization, and really all financial institutions, we have a lot of legacy apps. So it really helps to get Single Sign-On."
"It provides the breadth and the width to provide solutions for the different kinds of technologies which we have."
"Federation is valuable, for sure, because we have a lot of third-party vendors that we need to integrate with, and this is a turnkey solution in some ways."
"I faced difficulties from Micorosft's end and during the transition from Microsoft Active Directory to Microsoft Entra ID. Sometimes, some of Microsoft's documentation could be a little outdated."
"The support could be better. Lately, they sort of dropped off a bit in terms of quality."
"I would like to dive into some of the things that we saw today around the workflows at this Microsoft event. I cannot say that they need to make it better because I do not have much experience with it, but something that is always applicable to Microsoft is that they need to be able to integrate with their competitors. If you look at IDP, they do not integrate with Okta."
"The documentation could be better."
"Sometimes, the notifications and alerts are not delivered properly, and we end up missing them. Also, the overall graphical user interface needs to be improved."
"From time to time it takes a little bit of time to replicate, with some of the applications—something like five to 10 minutes. I know that the design is not supposed to enable real-time replication with some of the applications. But, as an administrator, I would like to run a specific change or modification in Azure Active Directory and see it replicated almost immediately."
"Though the installation was seamless, it took longer than expected to be completed."
"The technical support could improve by having a faster response time."
"The main thing is we do not have the traceability and good monitoring that CA can provide us to capture problems when they occur."
"All the problems that we reported actually have never been resolved. We could not capture enough information for CA to be able to debug the problem."
"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."
"The Federation part of CA Single Sign On, it's a bit complex to implement because it involves the SSL certificates, exchange of certificates, and lot of technical details. The documentation misses some important parts of this, so that's the reason it took some time for us to go live."
"To add more value to this solution it needs to be more user-friendly."
"An area Siteminder could improve on is that there are a few limitations, in terms of new protocols for OpenID. If I want to have different scopes, the features are limited. They also do not have APIs exposed, which is a major drawback. API is a feature I would like to see included in the next release."
"I would like to see a move towards the newer technologies, which is what we are doing right now. I think that's in the roadmap that's coming, in the 12.8 and 14 releases, but we would like to have it sooner than later."
"The tech support has not been very good for us so we don't use them anymore. We have had some issues. Nobody is perfect."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 190 reviews while Symantec Siteminder is ranked 13th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 69 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while Symantec Siteminder is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves us time and money and features Conditional Access policies, SSPR, and MFA". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Siteminder writes "Easy to implement and customize and very stable". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and Okta Workforce Identity, whereas Symantec Siteminder is most compared with Ping Identity Platform, ForgeRock, Okta Workforce Identity, Auth0 and Red Hat Single Sign On. See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. Symantec Siteminder report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors and best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Single Sign-On (SSO) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
