We compared Appgate SDP and Okta Workforce Identity across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Appgate SDP requires a moderately complex setup and has a learning curve, whereas Okta Workforce Identity offers a generally straightforward and easy setup. Appgate SDP provides flexibility and robustness with strong configuration capabilities, while Okta Workforce Identity is praised for its user-friendly nature and simplicity. Appgate SDP is considered expensive, while Okta Workforce Identity is reasonably priced. Appgate SDP's user interface is challenging to navigate, while Okta Workforce Identity's interface could be more intuitive. In summary, Appgate SDP prioritizes security and preventing lateral movement, while Okta Workforce Identity focuses on ease of use and integration capabilities.
"It is pretty stable."
"It is a scalable solution...The support answers your questions very fast."
"The interface is really friendly. It's simple to understand."
"The flexibility of the tool is valuable. It is very robust. It has a very robust configuration capability."
"One of the most important features is stopping lateral movement across our network."
"The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort."
"This solution has a lot of capabilities and features."
"It is a very stable solution."
"The most valuable features of Okta Workforce Identity are MFA, and SSO, which have high security."
"One of the most beneficial features of the solution is the user provisioning and the de-provisioning feature."
"The product is easy to use."
"The product requires very little maintenance."
"The product’s most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"It is dependent on the evolution of your user base. It depends on usage per user, so the more sign-ins there are, the more expensive it becomes, so it works best for smaller companies from a financial perspective."
"They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features to enhance remote micro connection."
"On the cloud, when you make some changes, it may be difficult."
"One thing that kind of sticks out to me is the ability to do a proper non-split tunnel. VPN tunnel-wise, it is not really a true unsplit tunnel, but I think that's just because of the way it's designed. A split VPN basically allows your system to talk to other systems without being forced down the tunnel. A VPN running in a non-split tunnel mode forces all the traffic down the tunnel to wherever you're VPNing to. It forces the traffic down so that the traffic is subject to the firewall and rules that you have in your corporate environment and such. It helps to prevent remote malicious folks that may be talking directly to that box from piggybacking into the corporate environment through it. They do it partially, but it would be nice to see more of an enterprise-level solution there."
"One limitation is that it's harder to provide access to multiple applications in the company with Appgate, but that's probably because of poor management."
"It would be better to connect to an application portal from any device. Documentation and support could be better."
"The user interface should be improved as it is not very easy to work with the updates."
"SSO and MFA for improved end-user experience, and protection against password spray attacks, account password self-service."
"The solution lacks an on-premises deployment model so it can't offer a hybrid solution. It would be ideal if clients had options that weren't just cloud-based."
"We have experienced some challenges in integrating this solution with Scope and Cognito."
"It only facilitates provisioning and not de-provisioning."
"The lifecycle management part can be improved. It should also have identity governance and the ability to choose a specific factor authentication at the application level. Its licensing and pricing can also be improved."
"The only aspect in which it can be improved is that the interface could be cleaner. I found this even when I was trying to do my certification exam because the certification is hands-on. You find yourself fumbling around a little bit to find simple things. This happens even when you start to get familiar with the product."
"Okta Workforce Identity could improve the way passwords are reset and how it interfaces with Microsoft."
"They also have single sign-on (SSO). When we bought Okta Workforce Identity a year and a half ago, I was also looking at SSO, but not much documentation was available for SSO. The documentation for SSO should be a little more robust for somebody who is implementing it for the first time."
Appgate SDP is ranked 10th in ZTNA as a Service with 6 reviews while Okta Workforce Identity is ranked 6th in ZTNA as a Service with 56 reviews. Appgate SDP is rated 8.8, while Okta Workforce Identity is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Appgate SDP writes "Helps us manage traffic-related issues and streamlines access management for the network ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Okta Workforce Identity writes "Extremely easy to work with, simple to set up, and reasonably priced ". Appgate SDP is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter and Netskope Private Access, whereas Okta Workforce Identity is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Google Cloud Identity, SailPoint IdentityIQ, Saviynt and Auth0. See our Appgate SDP vs. Okta Workforce Identity report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors and best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.