We performed a comparison between Auth0 and Symantec Siteminder based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It supports identity federation, FSO and multi-tenancy."
"The most valuable feature is that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"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."
"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 is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"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 very scalable because it provides a new environment for companies based on their number of users and other factors. The tool can take a lot of users."
"It's quite scalable."
"All of our applications get a point, click, and you are in, while we increase security at the same time."
"Right now, federation that comes out-of-the-box with single sign-on is the most valuable feature that we have, and also scalability."
"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."
"A valuable feature of Siteminder is the way it handles bulk traffic. The features it has, in terms of routing the traffic and load balancing, are good."
"It is very scalable. We have a very large customer base: 75 million customers."
"You can quickly deploy the entire product with a basic config within couple of hours."
"It's agent-based. It's convenient to deploy and integrate."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"There are indeed areas where the product could improve. For instance, Okta offers various application configurations, enabling access management, which the tool could consider implementing."
"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"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."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"In future releases, I would like to see maybe more capabilities with some more modern authentication."
"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."
"The main thing is we do not have the traceability and good monitoring that CA can provide us to capture problems when they occur."
"I think they need to integrate some of the newer types of authentication into the product. I'm not seeing the innovation when it comes to biometrics in the product."
"If the reporting feature can be integrated into SSO itself that will be an icing on the cake."
"We're currently unable to find information about if the solution can do a full implementation with SQL. Some better and more accessible documentation for new users or those curious about the product would be helpful."
"The support could be faster."
"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."
Auth0 is ranked 2nd in Access Management with 14 reviews while Symantec Siteminder is ranked 12th in Access Management with 69 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.2, while Symantec Siteminder is rated 8.0. 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 Symantec Siteminder writes "Easy to implement and customize and very stable". Auth0 is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access and ForgeRock, whereas Symantec Siteminder is most compared with PingFederate, ForgeRock, Okta Workforce Identity, PingAccess and Red Hat Single Sign On. See our Auth0 vs. Symantec Siteminder report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors and best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.
