We performed a comparison between Entrust Identity Enterprise and Microsoft Entra ID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Authentication Systems solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable solution. You can add users and credentials without problems."
"This solution is flexible and easy to use for our clients. We use it with different kinds of applications and integrate it with different processes."
"I am impressed with Entrust because they are one of the most advanced identity access management companies. Their portfolio of products is well aligned with the CISA zero trust framework. If you compare the features of Entrust products with the CISA pillars of zero trust, you'll see that they're perfectly matched with CISA requirements."
"The integration matrix of the solution is huge compared to others."
"Entrust is an enterprise account, and they have a support system. Their training is also top-notch, and they are willing to share their knowledge with their partners."
"The security features, multi-factor authentication, and service management features are valuable."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Entra ID are the login and the conditional access pieces."
"The most valuable feature of Azure AD is its ability to connect with services outside of Microsoft, although documentation is necessary to properly implement these connections."
"Microsoft Authenticator is highly secure."
"The best thing about Microsoft Entra ID is the ease of setup."
"It certainly centralizes usernames, and it certainly centralizes credentials. Companies have different tolerances for synchronizing those credentials versus redirecting to on-prem. The use case of maturing into the cloud helps from a SaaS adoption standpoint, and it also tends to be the jumping-off point for larger organizations to start doing PaaS and infrastructure as a service. So, platform as a service and infrastructure as a service kind of dovetail off the Active Directory synchronization piece and the email and SharePoint. It becomes a natural step for people, who wouldn't normally do infrastructure as a service, because they're already exposed to this, and they have already set up their email and SharePoint there. All of the components are there."
"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 security and infrastructure management features are the most valuable ones for us."
"The product is very costly compared to other alternative solutions."
"It functions well on-premises, but integrating it with cloud services like AWS or Azure could be challenging. There are issues with cloud integrations, such as Azure, AWS, and GCP."
"We are introducing new processes and are migrating to a new version. Once we explore new functionalities, we'll be able to assess what could be improved."
"I would like to improve the tool's implementation and pricing."
"When we add some user groups, at times they will not be properly configured. Also, sometimes Azure AD is not aware of the group policy, like the control, device functions, and settings, in detail. For example, you cannot configure these settings through mobile devices. It doesn't provide the flexibility to do that. The other challenge is that a third-party application may provide access without authorization."
"I would like to be able to authenticate Wi-Fi users using the Azure ID"
"The conditional access rules are a little limiting. There's greater scope for the variety of rules and conditions you could put in that rules around a more factual authentication for other users. If you have an Azure AD setup, you can then connect to other people's Azure AD, but you don't have a huge amount of control in terms of what you can do. Greater control over guest users and guest access would be better. It's pretty good as it is but that could be improved."
"The main issue is that because Active Directory is in the cloud, it will inevitably be dependent on internet connectivity."
"Azure AD needs to be more in sync. The synchronization can be time-consuming."
"For the end users, it can be confusing if they have worked for another company that had the Authenticator app. It is tricky if they have already had the Authenticator app and then work somewhere else. If they have to download it again and use it again on their phone, it is something that gets complicated. I know how to get through it. They just need to uninstall and reinstall the application, but for them, sometimes, it is confusing."
"The Azure AD Application Proxy, which helps you publish applications in a secure way, has room for improvement. We are moving from another solution into the Application Proxy and it's quite detailed. Depending on the role you're signing in as, you can end up at different websites, which wasn't an issue with our old solution."
"Everything should be in one package. There are so many different packages. They need to provide guidance because there are so many features and we don't know how to implement them in our organization."
Entrust Identity Enterprise is ranked 9th in Authentication Systems with 7 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Authentication Systems with 190 reviews. Entrust Identity Enterprise is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Entrust Identity Enterprise writes "Provides strong authentication feature, which requires users to enter a one-time password (OTP) ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves us time and money and features Conditional Access policies, SSPR, and MFA". Entrust Identity Enterprise is most compared with Cisco Duo, DigiCert PKI Platform, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, RSA Authentication Manager and RSA SecurID, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and Okta Workforce Identity. See our Entrust Identity Enterprise vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Authentication Systems vendors and best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Authentication Systems 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.
