We performed a comparison between Oracle Identity Governance and SailPoint IdentityIQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two User Provisioning Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."User-friendly solution."
"Omada's best feature is creating accounts, automatically assigning permissions, and distributing resources based on assignment policies."
"The support response time and the freedom from strange bugs and strange things happening in the software are valuable."
"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."
"For me, the best feature of Omada Identity is its web interface because it's really easy for users to understand."
"It has a lot of out-of-the-box features. It is flexible, and there are a lot of possibilities to configure and extend it. It is user-friendly. It has an interface that is end-user or business-user friendly."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is that it is Microsoft-based and it supports all Microsoft technology."
"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."
"Oracle Identity manager is the best tool in the market for access managers."
"Role-based access control (RBAC) has been crucial for role-based management in my current company. Granular access restrictions based on role-based policies were beneficial."
"Good features are the RBAC and UI customization."
"The support service of Oracle is good. We use it a lot and their response is quick."
"The one thing that stands out was is the automatic sign-out when an employee goes on vacation. Identity Governance can monitor when an employee goes on vacation and returns. We use this feature to automatically disable all the employee's accounts when they go on vacation, and they're automatically enabled when they come back."
"What I found most useful in Oracle Identity Governance, feature-wise, are provisioning, de-provisioning, and termination. Those features are very good. Oracle Identity Governance can also be easily integrated with non-Oracle products, which I find valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible automation functionality which has optimized our user access privilege management. This has allowed us to create and delete user accounts more accurately and efficiently. This feature has enabled us to save time and resources needed to perform mundane manual tasks."
"Its most valuable feature is its scalability."
"We are happy with the SailPoint IdentityIQ’s stability."
"This solution is easy to configure."
"The Certification and Provisioning features are most valuable."
"We like the integration with other systems."
"User provisioning and the role management features are good."
"The community is very active and when I had questions about an issue, I was able to find the resources."
"The solution is pretty stable and simple to use."
"The big one now is that they're adding AI and machine learning to figure out automated approvals and make recommendations to their reviewers. So, if I bring up Doug McPherson and it says he has access to this application, the system will make a review based on peer group analysis. That's one of the biggest new things. The problem used to be that people would get everything loaded on, and they created too much work for themselves. Now, they can use these policies and start to let the machine pick the less risky things."
"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."
"They need to improve the cost for small companies."
"The web GUI can be improved."
"If you're running Omada on a cloud service, you may have some issues deploying the newest release. Sometimes, the latest release doesn't adapt to the processes we have already installed. Identity Access Management is a critical system for our organization, and we need to ensure that everyone has the same access as they did before the release."
"The Omada Identity SaaS version doesn't provide all the features Omada Identity on-premise provides."
"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."
"The architecture of the entire system should also be less complex. The way they process the data is complex."
"The reporting on the warehouse data and the import process both have room for improvement."
"Identity Governance is a difficult tool to work with. You have to input many models to understand what is happening with the logins. The user interface is not so good. And a lot of the features we use aren't available out of the box."
"Pricing for Oracle Identity Governance could be improved. The setup process for the tool could also be faster."
"The cost of this product needs to be reduced."
"The solution needs to improve its web interface in the next release."
"One of the areas that need some improvement with Oracle specifically is the ease of implementation."
"They need to improve their backup strategy."
"OIA needs to improve its governance features."
"It would be great if the Oracle Fusion Middleware team worked on making it compatible with other application servers, as it exists in OIM9.x."
"The mover process for this solution could be improved."
"There is a need for further enhancements, specifically in the multifactor authentication capabilities."
"The UI of the solution could be more customizable so we could change the workflows to suit our needs."
"Regarding the scope for improvement in the solution, reporting is an area that can be a bit more UI-oriented."
"There are various functions that don't work in IdentityIQ, including the access request reminder, which doesn't go to the approvals in the proper format, so it's hard for users to read."
"It is not readily available and cannot be downloaded from the net."
"The interface should be simple and easier to use."
"The price of IdentityIQ could be lower. There are additional costs when you buy the licenses, and they force the customers to pay for them."
Oracle Identity Governance is ranked 4th in User Provisioning Software with 66 reviews while SailPoint IdentityIQ is ranked 1st in User Provisioning Software with 61 reviews. Oracle Identity Governance is rated 7.4, while SailPoint IdentityIQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Oracle Identity Governance writes "A scalable solution designed to meet the requirements of medium and large-sized companies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SailPoint IdentityIQ writes "Flexible, easy to customize, and not too difficult to set up". Oracle Identity Governance is most compared with One Identity Manager, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Saviynt, Microsoft Identity Manager and ForgeRock, whereas SailPoint IdentityIQ is most compared with Saviynt, Microsoft Entra ID, One Identity Manager, ForgeRock and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine). See our Oracle Identity Governance vs. SailPoint IdentityIQ report.
See our list of best User Provisioning Software vendors and best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all User Provisioning Software 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.
Here follow my inputs about your questions concerning SailPoint IQ and Oracle.
WHERE DOES IT COMES FROM?
1. As representatives of SailPoint told me in 2008, SailPoint IQ was designed in 2005 by reusing the functional and technical requirements of SocGen Corporate Investment Banking (I participated to the initial design in 2004 in Paris… we live in a small world).
2. Oracle Identity Governance was formerly RBAC X purchased by Sun Microsystems then selected as the Identity Analytics components by Oracle.
WHAT ARE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THAT?
Both solutions are based on the Role Based Access Control model (RBAC) consisting of telling who occupies some business roles to be granted more or less consistent list of authorizations.
This is a model of the second generation while the NIST envisioned up to 6 generations in 2009! So… it’s a pretty old model.
IF ONE ORGANIZATION SUCCEEDS TO MAKE IT WITH RBAC
If one succeeds to implement this model, then it is possible to tell:
1. Who should have access to what by occupying a role that has to be mined with a half automated process that is pretty laboring and expensive,
2. Who has ‘’out role’’ entitlements to be terminated. Reviews of entitlements can be focused on ‘’Out roles’’ and even if they don’t understand the descriptions of authorizations, managers can take a decision.
HEAVY PREREQUISITES TO MAKE IT
LABOR, TIME AND CASH BECAUSE OF HEAVY PREREQUISITES
If one large organization is willing to satisfy the core prerequisite of these 2 solutions, it is necessary:
1. to spend 30 to 60 minutes for each department of an organization to mine User Roles and to associate a list of authorizations that are impossible to understand by any business analyst,
2. then spend about an hour with each manager to validate the roles and associated entitlements (impossible to understand by managers as well),
3. last but not least, implement the roles and lists of entitlements.
REAL USE CASE IN THE USA
Large organizations are totally unable to implement such an approach for following reasons:
1. ..X for example used SailPoint IQ and mined 1.500 roles instead of estimated 15.000 (low estimation),
2. ..X was unable to validate roles because managers could not understand labels of authorizations such as: ZZX00152, ZX215521, zz_top_group_senior,…
3. it would have been:
a. too long to make it for 126.000 employees / 10 team members in average = 12.600 work units located in about 100 countries * 30 minutes in average = 787 man days without vacations, travels, coordination!
b. too expensive:
i. 1 role analyst * 30 minutes in average * 80$ per hour * 12.600 units = 504.000$ for role mining only
ii. 1 role analyst + 1 manager * 220$ per hour * 12.600 units = 2.772 K$ for role validation
iii. Implementation of roles into IAM solution such as Oracle Identity Manager or IBM SIM is a technical thing that costs more…
IF ONE ORGANIZATION CANNOT MAKE IT BECAUSE MANAGERS DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT MEANS ‘’ZX023455``
SailPoint and Oracle have nice features to add translations to entitlements.
The thing is that where you have several ten thousand labels to translate…
* it takes time and lots of $ before to deliver.
* People around a table will take time to come to a shared understanding (if they are very motivated)
IF ONE ORGANIZATION CANNOT MAKE IT BECAUSE IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO TRANSLATE ‘’ZX023455``
* SailPoint proposes to use Risk Based approach and to add Risk Criteria to several ten thousands labels… (sic) to be considered from a Risk Standpoint…
* Oracle proposes to use indicators and requests and to let managers think about a decision to be taken thanks to dashboards and reports. Some kind of Business Intelligence.
WHAT IS THE OPTION?
1. ...X came to the conclusion that it was not possible to make it with SailPoint IQ alone. A custom algorithm is necessary to enhance SailPoint capabilities.
2. The Gartner Group exposed the issue for the last 3 years. Advanced analytics and Self Learning systems will make it.
3. We, at EasyPatternZ:
a. are the first to make it with Artificial Intelligence.
b. take about 5 seconds per work unit in average to deliver the answer to the question ‘’Who has access to what, why, whatever the circumstances’’ better and faster than any leader.
c. made it 3 times since 2013. The Federal Government of Canada will qualify it between April and July this year with 23.000 employees.
d. Are watched by USCIS.
My experience in IAM is with HPE Aruba ClearPass & Cisco ISE. A couple of other competing products, such as the ForeScout and Auconet products that were evaluated at a high level, but didn’t progress further.
I’m not at all familiar with Sailpoint IdentityIQ and Oracle Identity Governance and couldn’t provide any meaningful insight into either of them.
I am not an SC so my response is very salesy :).
Sailpiont is more of a next gen solution in the IAM space.
If an organization was a huge Oracle shop I would have them consider Oracle – if not I would be heading to Sailpoint.
*Sailpoint is as robust but does not have the legacy issues that Oracle has to deal with which makes it easier to implement/operate
Sailpoint will also be lower in price.
Basically the question is 'what will you achive ?'. I agree with the comment above, Oracle is known to have a high TCO due to complexity. The fact is also that Oracle claims to ease the end-user experience but this mean a mandatory extensive preparation in order to provide users with accurate and in context information. Sailpoint IIQ is probably easier to implement and indeed is efficient in respect of RBAC and ABAC or preferably some kind of hybrid modeling. Don't forget IAM needs a very good preparation (analysis, modeling, inventory, classification, process analysis etc.) From my experience, IIQ is able to respond to complex needs and is far cheaper than Oracle and this allows to invest in added value activities (extra licence). Sorry if this is not a factual response in terms of pros & conts between OIG and IIQ but IIQ is more affordable and from my point of view covers all needed capabilities to build a strong IAM solution.
I think at a high level, both are going to provide the same functions. You'll see the main differences in how one has to implement workflows, UIs, and rules. Where Oracle uses BPML, ADF and OES, respectively, SailPoint is more Java-centric, IMHO. I found OIG's SOD rule definition UI hard to use and some serious limitations in its hierarchal role model. I think SailPoint has surpassed OIG in its extensibility with the framework in its 7.0 release. I would definitely evaluate roadmap if you want to stay on-prem.