We performed a comparison between ForgeRock and IBM Security Verify Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity Management (IM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature in Omada is the governance. We work with other products and other product vendors, but the sweet spot in the market for Omada is where things are heavy on governance."
"We don't have to go in and do a lot of the work that we did before. It may have saved us somewhere in the range of 10 to 30 percent of the time we spent on provisioning access."
"The support response time and the freedom from strange bugs and strange things happening in the software are valuable."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is that it is Microsoft-based and it supports all Microsoft technology."
"The most valuable feature is the automatic provisioning and reconciliation of things like the Active Directory groups and memberships."
"The Governance and self-service that can be set up so you can use them yourself to work in the system are the most valuable features. End users can be enabled to help themselves."
"Surveying is a valuable feature because it allows us to import data and see who has access to what data, for example."
"You can make resources. You can import them from Azure or Active Directory and put them in an application. For example, if there is an application that uses a lot of Active Directory groups, you can make the groups available for people. If they need to access that application, you can tell them the resource groups you have for that application. People can do everything by themselves. They do not need anybody else. They can just go to the Omada portal, and they can do it all by themselves. That is terrific."
"I like the intelligent authentication feature."
"Easy to navigate, handle and manage the applications."
"We used it to implement multi-factor authentication and to improve our security posture as well as reducing the potential for attacks."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the authentication for the consumers. The integration with other third-party applications is excellent."
"This is a stable solution. When you do experience any issues, you will see it in your DB logs or audit logs so you can easily reach a conclusion of might be causing it."
"Installation and configuration are pretty easy for ForgeRock OpenIDM."
"Easy to customize and adaptable to any environment."
"The solution is very scalable. We have a lot of users that have been increasing over the years that we have been using it. We have approximately 20,000 users."
"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth. For legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users. From the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Security Access Manager, at least for my company, is multi-factor authentication. That's the only feature my company is using. The solution works well and has no glitches. IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via email or SMS. This ensures secure access to your accounts by providing multiple authentication options."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"Omada's performance could be better because we had some latency issues. Still, it's difficult to say how much of that is due to Omada versus the resources used by our other vendors in our on-prem environment. Considering the resources we have invested into making it run well, it's slightly slower than we would expect."
"In our organization, all the data is event-driven, which means that if an attribute is changed in the source system, it can be updated within a few seconds in all end-user systems. There is room for improvement in Omada regarding that. Omada is still batch-based for some processes, so sometimes it can take an hour or even four hours before the execution is run and the update is sent."
"The Omada support response time has room for improvement."
"What I would most like to see added to the product is role management, especially enterprise or business role management, and the processes around that."
"The current reporting tools in Omada are limited, but we expect significant improvements in the new version."
"The solution should be made more agile for customers to own or configure."
"The reporting and importing have room for improvement."
"The user interface should have a more flexible design, where you can change it to your requirement."
"I think the upgrade process is sometimes a little complicated and there are failures that occur."
"The solution requires more simplified customization. However, part of the problem is my clients determining their own preferences. Technology can help and do many things, but you have to define your own policies to ensure that the solution or service works within those parameters. Helping customers understand their business and different processes is another issue not relating to the functionality of this solution."
"It should be a little bit easier to implement. It is user-friendly, but there is always scope for improvement."
"We're worried about the scaling. We're told it will be okay and there won't be issues, however, I'm not 100% convinced."
"We would like this solution to be developed for use with mobile applications."
"The only problem with ForgeRock is that it is derived from an open-source product, so sometimes it's a bit unstable."
"The solution's documentation is not very good, and they do not give more details."
"They should improve the solution by include reporting."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area. OIDC is a third-party integration that we do with the cloud platforms, and OAuth is an authorization mechanism for allowing a user having an account with Google or any other provider to access an application. Organizations these days are looking for just-in-time provisioning use cases, but IBM Security Access Manager is not very mature for such use cases. There are only a few applications that can be integrated, and this is where this product is lagging. However, in terms of configuration and single sign-on mechanisms, it is a great product."
"There are a lot of areas that can be improved, but the main area is the lack of customization. You cannot easily customize anything in the product. It is not easy to tweak the functionality. It is challenging to change the out-of-the-box functionality."
"The solution could be classified as a hilt system. There are a lot of resources being used and it is suitable for very large enterprises or the public sector."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain."
ForgeRock is ranked 6th in Identity Management (IM) with 27 reviews while IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 17th in Identity Management (IM) with 7 reviews. ForgeRock is rated 8.0, while IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ForgeRock writes "Governance and access management solution used for multi-factor authentication that is outdated with an unresponsive UI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "Supports on-prem and cloud environments, has good integration capabilities, and is easy to adopt". ForgeRock is most compared with SailPoint Identity Security Cloud, Ping Identity Platform, Microsoft Entra ID, Auth0 and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Workforce Identity, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM), Ping Identity Platform and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. See our ForgeRock vs. IBM Security Verify Access report.
See our list of best Identity Management (IM) vendors and best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Identity Management (IM) 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.
