We performed a comparison between ForgeRock and RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle 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."You can make resources. You can import them from Azure or Active Directory and put them in an application. For example, if there is an application that uses a lot of Active Directory groups, you can make the groups available for people. If they need to access that application, you can tell them the resource groups you have for that application. People can do everything by themselves. They do not need anybody else. They can just go to the Omada portal, and they can do it all by themselves. That is terrific."
"What I like most is that we can always find a solution, and we can also find the cause when something goes wrong. I like that the most because everything is in one way or another traceable. That is what I like most. I like its reliability."
"The benefits of Omada Identity include a holistic way of viewing access, the ability to give people access, and automation."
"User-friendly solution."
"The most valuable aspects of Omada Identity for me are the automation capabilities."
"We don't have to go in and do a lot of the work that we did before. It may have saved us somewhere in the range of 10 to 30 percent of the time we spent on provisioning access."
"It has a very user-friendly interface compared to what we are used to, and it is highly configurable. In the old solution, when we needed to do something, we had to have a programmer sitting next to us, whereas, in Omada Identity, everything is configurable."
"Our customers have benefited from Omada Identity automating the certification process. Most of our customers were using manual methods for user access certification. With Omada Identity, you can automate almost all of it, which means that certification now becomes on demand. You don't have to wait for two or three months to execute a certification timeframe. Instead, you can do certifications as often as you want."
"Their access management solution, OpenAM, is most valuable because it meets the needs of a lot of users."
"This is a stable solution. When you do experience any issues, you will see it in your DB logs or audit logs so you can easily reach a conclusion of might be causing it."
"The solution integrates well and it is important for them to keep up with the current trends in the market quickly enough, and they have been doing a good job at it."
"We create and define the permissions and configurations for the users."
"We have found the identity and access management tools in the solution to be particularly useful for our organization."
"ForgeRock has CIAM, which other products didn't have, and they have DevOps ready."
"The most valuable features are that it is easy to manage and it's stable."
"We used it to implement multi-factor authentication and to improve our security posture as well as reducing the potential for attacks."
"RSA Identity Governance and lifecycles are good for the access certification and auditing sections."
"Roles, connectors for provisioning and re-accreditation or reviews help greatly to govern user access."
"The data collection is excellent and easy to do. It does not require a lot of configuration nor does it require rules to be written like other competitors do."
"With the tool in place, you need to hire fewer people to provide access, and you have control over your processes."
"The most valuable feature is the security, in particular, the One Time Password support."
"The architecture of the entire system should also be less complex. The way they process the data is complex."
"When making a process, you should be able to use some coding to do some advanced calculations. The calculations you can currently do are too basic. I would also like some additional script features."
"We are trying to use Omada's standards and to adapt our processes. But we have had some trouble with the bad documentation. This is something that they could improve on. It has not been possible for us to analyze some of the problems so far, based on the documentation. We always need consultants. The documentation should include some implementation hints and some guidelines for implementing the processes."
"The UI design needs improvement. One or two years ago, Omada changed its user interface to simplify, but the simplification has not really kicked in."
"The comprehensiveness of Omada's out-of-the-box connectors for the applications we use could be better. We are getting a new HR system called Cornerstone for which they do not have an out-of-the-box connector, so we have to take the REST connector and play around with it."
"The user interface could be improved. The interface between Omada and the user is mainly text-based."
"The user interface should have a more flexible design, where you can change it to your requirement."
"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 solution's documentation is not very good, and they do not give more details."
"The identity management model needs a bit of improvement."
"We would like this solution to be developed for use with mobile applications."
"I find that it's quite expensive for just an open-source system. Support is quite expensive."
"I think the upgrade process is sometimes a little complicated and there are failures that occur."
"It should be a little bit easier to implement. It is user-friendly, but there is always scope for improvement."
"The only problem with ForgeRock is that it is derived from an open-source product, so sometimes it's a bit unstable."
"Lacks simplified documentation within the tool that requires use of a separate portal."
"Technical support in Pakistan can be improved."
"If you use the appliance version then it won't handle a huge database volume."
"This product is missing a lot of features which other competitors are providing. One of the key features that are missing right now is risk scoring. Additionally, there is not much scope for customization - everything is hard-coded and predefined, so it does not allow the developers to make many modifications."
"The user interface and workflow need improvement, and more connectors would help."
"RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle could improve out-of-the-box customization."
"Every connector that you have in the product needs to be custom-built, so there are not a lot of standard connectors available in the product, because of which there are a lot of hidden consultancy costs."
"There are scalability issues. This product does not scale very well. It is not a good product for load balancing / active–active architecture."
More RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle Pricing and Cost Advice →
ForgeRock is ranked 6th in Identity Management (IM) with 27 reviews while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is ranked 23rd in Identity Management (IM) with 9 reviews. ForgeRock is rated 8.0, while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is rated 6.8. 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 RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle writes "Lacking customization, poor support, but useful auditing". ForgeRock is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, PingID, Microsoft Entra ID, Auth0 and Symantec Siteminder, whereas RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Saviynt, One Identity Manager, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine). See our ForgeRock vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle report.
See our list of best Identity Management (IM) 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.
