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."We used to have a problem where an employee's access wasn't terminated when they left the company. Now, we have much better visibility into and control over who has access."
"The support for the validity of the resources is valuable. The tool allows resource assignments within a validity period so that the managers do not have to remember to revoke the access once the work is done."
"I'm not using Omada, but the interface is easy to use and gives you a solid overview of your identities."
"Omada's user interface is elegant and easy to work with. I like Omada's ability to automatically generate accounts for new hires and allow them access to all required systems by established policies. Around 80 percent of workers can start working immediately on their first day without requesting further access."
"Omada offers a technical solution that addresses both our needs."
"The thing that I find most valuable is that Omada consists of building blocks, which means that you can configure almost anything you want without using custom code, making it pretty easy to do. It's possible to connect to multiple target systems and to create one role that consists of different permissions in the different target systems. So one role in Omada can make sure that you have an account in three different systems."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to set up connectors to various IT systems and offer a wide range of supported connectors."
"The key benefit of Omada Identity is maintaining complete control."
"ForgeRock has CIAM, which other products didn't have, and they have DevOps ready."
"I like the intelligent authentication feature."
"Installation and configuration are pretty easy for ForgeRock OpenIDM."
"Easy to navigate, handle and manage the applications."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the authentication for the consumers. The integration with other third-party applications is excellent."
"The product is easy to set up."
"We create and define the permissions and configurations for the users."
"I like the way it is handling authentication and authorization."
"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."
"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."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"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."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"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."
"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."
"The web GUI can be improved."
"When you do a recalculation of an identity, it's hard to understand what was incorrect before you started the recalculation, and which values are actually updated... all you see are all the new fields that are provisioned, instead of seeing only the fields that are changed."
"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 user interface could be improved. The interface between Omada and the user is mainly text-based."
"The Omada Identity SaaS version doesn't provide all the features Omada Identity on-premise provides."
"Omada could make it a bit more convenient to send emails based on events automatically. Having that functionality is critical for us to maintain transparency."
"I think the upgrade process is sometimes a little complicated and there are failures that occur."
"The user interface could be improved as it is cumbersome and outdated. It doesn't have a responsive UI."
"ForgeRock is an open source solution and is available to everyone but it is not freeware. If you need support, you need a subscription for ForgeRock. Many of its functionalities need to be built up with the help of a consultant."
"We raised tickets asking for improvements, but sometimes we don't get the proper solution. They are responding, but the ticket is open for weeks and weeks. For some issues, we don't get a satisfactory solution or the solution doesn't work."
"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."
"I find that it's quite expensive for just an open-source system. Support is quite expensive."
"The solution's documentation is not very good, and they do not give more details."
"Lacks simplified documentation within the tool that requires use of a separate portal."
"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."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"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 user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"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."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
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 IdentityIQ, PingID, 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), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and PingID. 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.
