We performed a comparison between Auth0 and Imprivata OneSign 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 that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"It's a very powerful platform. It has the ability to do the usual stuff, according to modern protocols, like OIDC and OAuth 2. But the real benefit of using the platform comes from its flexibility to enhance it with rules and, now, with what they call authentication pipelines. That is the most significant feature, as it allows you to customize everything regarding the authentication and authorization process."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"The most important thing for me is compliance. Everything that they have developed in Auth0 is already certified by many regulators such as ISO. So, we do not need to take care of that. We have the shared responsibility model to share assets with other products we are using in the cloud."
"It has a lot of customization and out-of-the-box features."
"It has improved our organization by providing login authentication for a mobile app."
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"The most valuable feature is interface application integration, but we haven't fully used it yet. We'll need it in the future for a few potential clients."
"It has benefited my organization in the way that it makes it more secure by making it harder to hack."
"It provides a service that allows users to sign in to whatever application they are using. This is the most important feature of this solution."
"In the past, there was an issue with the multi-tenant where there wasn't the ability to manage them."
"I think they can do a better job in explaining what you're supposed to do next in order to correctly follow an idiomatic approach to using the solution beyond simply passing a JWT token to a server and having the server check then signature to validate the token."
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"There is a possibility to improve the machine-to-machine authentication flow. This part of Auth0 is not really well documented, and we could really gain some additional knowledge on that."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"They should have a landing page."
"I would like for them to make this solution compatible with Mac OS. I would also like for them to provide a portal so that users can easily integrate it with their applications."
Auth0 is ranked 3rd in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 14 reviews while Imprivata OneSign is ranked 12th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 2 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.2, while Imprivata OneSign is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Auth0 writes "Has good documentation but improvement is needed in MFA and application configurations ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imprivata OneSign writes "Reasonably priced, performs well, easy to deploy, and has responsive technical support". Auth0 is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access and ForgeRock, whereas Imprivata OneSign is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Evidian Enterprise SSO, Okta Workforce Identity, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and PingFederate. See our Auth0 vs. Imprivata OneSign report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) 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.