We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID and RSA Authentication Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Authentication Systems solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution allows users to authenticate from home, and the Office 360 integration is advantageous."
"The most valuable feature is the authentication platform."
"With Azure Active Directory we were able to manage with different options the access for different users."
"The most valuable feature is the factor identification. I find that it is natural integration, and it is just a natural step. I do not need to do anything else."
"We can have an audit and we can easily audit logs."
"It can be used to grant access at a granular level. It provides secure access and many ways to offer security to your user resources. It provides a good level of security for any access on Azure. It gives you options like multi-factor authentication where apart from your password, you can use other factors for authentication, such as a code is sent to your phone or the authenticator app that you can use login."
"Its ability to provide secure connections to people at all locations is the most valuable. It is mostly used by enterprises."
"The valuable features I use daily are enterprise application, conditional access, identity governance, password monitoring, and a password reset."
"It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten."
"I have found RSA Authentication Manager to be scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the SecurID."
"The most valuable feature is the provision part. The mapping and the logging is also very good. In addition, the troubleshooting, from a console point of view, is easy for administration and on the provisioning and logging part."
"Easy setup, deployment, and integration in different infrastructures, including virtual ones."
"It stands out as a comprehensive and adaptable solution that excels in both on-premises and cloud-based authentication, offers strong security with multi-layered authentication, and boasts a well-maintained product with reliable performance."
"It is a good solution for token identification."
"The custom role creation function could be improved as it's somewhat tricky to use."
"Initially, we wanted to exclude specific users from MSA. So, we had a condition policy, which forces MSA for all the users. So we wanted to exclude users who are using an NPS extension. So it was not listed, as a NPS extension was not listed outside an application, in actual, so, we go back and were not able to exclude users using NPS extension from MSA. So that was one limitation that we found and we had to work around that."
"Whatever business requirements we needed in the past three years, users were created, with the name of the user and they were not connected with the Active Directory. We were trying to in house in three years and with directory, but we were not able to achieve it."
"Many people believe that the Azure Active Directory is overly complicated and antiquated."
"The monitoring dashboard could be a bit better."
"The licensing and support are expensive and have room for improvement."
"The initial setup was complex."
"The ability to manage and authenticate against on-premises solutions would be beneficial."
"Perhaps parts of the the user interface should become more intuitive."
"We are not planning on using the solution in the future."
"Our major problem is the authentication via Microsoft, via Microsoft cloud systems. This is our major aim, to be a valued product for the future. The biggest problem is to work against cheap cloud systems. Cloud identification is our main problem at this time."
"Enhancing the user interface and expanding their marketing efforts in regions like Nigeria and West Africa could be beneficial."
"We have encountered issue when trying to expand this particular solution for a large set of users across the country."
"We found technical support was not very responsive to our requests for assistance."
"There is room for improvement in the RSA support."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Authentication Systems with 190 reviews while RSA Authentication Manager is ranked 14th in Authentication Systems with 10 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while RSA Authentication Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Authentication Manager writes "A highly effective and versatile solution that excels in terms of security, integration, scalability, and customer support". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Yubico YubiKey and Cisco Duo, whereas RSA Authentication Manager is most compared with Cisco Duo, RSA SecurID, RSA Adaptive Authentication, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Thales Authenticators. See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. RSA Authentication Manager report.
See our list of best Authentication Systems vendors.
We monitor all Authentication Systems 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.