We performed a comparison between IBM Security Verify Access and Microsoft Entra ID 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 administrative features and SoD are valuable."
"The most valuable aspects of Omada Identity for me are the automation capabilities."
"The most valuable feature in Omada is the governance. We work with other products and other product vendors, but the sweet spot in the market for Omada is where things are heavy on governance."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is that it is Microsoft-based and it supports all Microsoft technology."
"User-friendly solution."
"Omada's onboarding features reflect our processes for onboarding new employees well. That is the primary reason we use this solution. We use role-based access control. I'm not sure how much it has improved our security posture, but it's made managing identities more convenient."
"The most valuable functionality of the solution for us is that when employees stop working for the municipality, they are automatically disabled in Active Directory. Omada controls that 100 percent. They are disabled for 30 days, and after that time Omada deletes the Active Directory account. The same type of thing happens when we employ a new person. Their information is automatically imported to Omada and they are equipped with the roles and rights so they can do their jobs."
"The most relevant feature is Omada's reporting engine. Omada never 'forgets' and archives every process. All steps an admin, user, or manager has executed, are recorded in Omada."
"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."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"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."
"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."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"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."
"The solution offers business to business and client to business support."
"The tool's most valuable feature is conditional access."
"Azure Active Directory provides us with identity-based authentication, which secures access at the user level and also integrates with conditional access policies and multi-factor authentication helping to increase the identity security for that person. So, the hacking and leaking of passwords is a secondary problem because you will not authenticate a person with one factor. There is a second factor of authentication available to increase the security premise for your company."
"It helps with privacy control of identity data. It makes security very easy."
"Privileged Identity Management and Privileged Identity Management make controlling access considerably easier and ensure that authorized access is achieved."
"Overall, I think the support and the pictorial format of this web portal are very good."
"Two very important features in terms of security are governance and compliance through the Conditional Access policies and Azure Log Analytics."
"Azure Active Directory provides access to resources in a very secure manner. We can detect which user is logging in to access resources on the cloud. It gives us a comprehensive audit trace in terms of from where a user signed in and whether a sign-in is a risky sign-in or a normal sign-in. So, there is a lot of security around the access to resources, which helps us in realizing that a particular sign-in is not a normal sign-in. If a sign-in is not normal, Azure Active Directory automatically blocks it for us and sends us an email, and unless we allow that user, he or she won't be able to log in. So, the User Identity Protection feature is the most liked feature for me in Azure Active Directory."
"If I had to name one thing, it would be the user interface (UI)."
"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."
"Its flexibility is both a good thing and a bad thing. Because it is very flexible, it also becomes too complex. This is common for most of the products we evaluated. Its scalability should be better. It had a few scalability issues."
"They need to improve the cost for small companies."
"It is not possible to customize reports on Omada Identity."
"The architecture of the entire system should also be less complex. The way they process the data is complex."
"Improved traceability would be helpful for administrators. For example, let's say a user's permission is being revoked. We can only see the system that has carried out a particular action but not what triggered it. If an event definition or something has changed in the criteria for the permission being removed or something like that, we don't have immediate access to that information. It takes a little detective work."
"We are still on Omada on-prem, but I understand that when Omada is in the cloud, you cannot send an attachment via email. We have some emails with attachments for new employees because we have to explain to them how to register and do their multi-factor authentication. All that information is in the attachment. People have to do that before they are in our system. We cannot give them a link to our Intranet and SharePoint because they do not yet have access. They have to register before that, so I need to send the attachments, but this functionality is not there in the cloud."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"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."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"The dashboard and interface could be better. It would be ideal if it was easier to use."
"I would like it to be easier to integrate third-party applications."
"I want to see new functionalities for the active directory."
"At first, it was a bit challenging to come up with a workaround that would get authentication to work."
"The scalability of the solution is good."
"When it comes to identity and access life cycle management for applications that are run on-premises, as well as access governance, if those kinds of capabilities could be built into Azure Active Directory, that would be good."
"They should put the features of P1 and P2 into a single license."
"Though the installation was seamless, it took longer than expected to be completed."
IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 14th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 7 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 190 reviews. IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "Supports on-prem and cloud environments, has good integration capabilities, and is easy to adopt". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Okta Workforce Identity, ForgeRock, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and PingID, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco Duo and Yubico YubiKey. See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors, best Identity Management (IM) vendors, and best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) 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.
