We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Okta Workforce Identity 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 ease of use is really nice. Using Authenticator, I've been able to actually work better on my authentication due to the fact that I have a single fabric to authenticate control from my firewall and on my access points. Authentication takes place from this area."
"The product is stable and reliable."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is easy."
"The implementation has significantly improved access management within our organization."
"The product is good, cost-effective, and functionally efficient."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is RADIUS service and the social network integration feature."
"Intuitive interface and easy to deploy."
"The current version is stable...Scalability-wise, it is a fine solution"
"It offers very helpful support. The technical team is very helpful."
"The provisioning functionality has been the most valuable. This solution has good performance, fast integration and is very responsive."
"We find the solution to be reliable for our customers and it is nice that it is cloud-based and can be accessed from anywhere."
"The ease of deployment, ease of use, and speed of delivery is what I like about Okta Workforce Identity. It is very easy to use. For a lot of software, you need to be trained extensively and have a very technical background. Okta Workforce Identity is quite simple. You can integrate any software into Okta. They've got a network of 7,000 applications that easily integrate into it."
"We find the solution to be stable."
"I find the provisioning features and the integration with other applications useful."
"Having a single sign-on to all our applications."
"It is a very stable solution."
"I would like to see more support from Fortinet with tech support people who have as much expertise on the authenticator as they do on their firewalls."
"Integration with some other enterprise applications could be improved."
"We have issues with HA (high availability). These should be addressed in future releases."
"The hardware aspect of the solution could be improved. We are not really able to understand the hardware capabilities of the device."
"The GUI has some shortcomings and can be made better. The GUI is not great."
"There are some protocols, such as SHA and SHA-2, that are not supported."
"If you want some other FortiAuthenticator from one site to another site, you should have requirements, but really if you have authentication and directory or another solution, you should change the password of the authenticator between the solution and the directory and other things. So transfer of data and other information should be simpler."
"The integration with third-party tools must be better."
"It would be pricing, which is a tough one because it goes against Microsoft. A lot of companies say they're a Microsoft partner, and they get all their software for free. Okta is like a luxury product, and it's not the most affordable one. I would say if they could work on pricing, it would help. Other than that, they've done great strides in developing a product that is really good. The companies that do see the value tend to invest in it."
"A room for improvement in Okta Workforce Identity is its price. It could be cheaper. The biggest benefit of the solution is that everything works securely without extra steps, so you're saving on your workforce's time and effort because your applications work smoothly and securely, but you'd need to pay some amount of money for that. Another area that could be improved, though not necessarily regarding Okta Workforce Identity, is the SSO applications because so many of the source applications charge extra money to put the SSO to work, which means you have to buy a more expensive license. Nowadays, SSO is a mainstream functionality and it should be out-of-the-box in those applications because it's so easy to set up."
"Okta Workforce Identity could improve the way passwords are reset and how it interfaces with Microsoft."
"On the admin side, we can create our own passwords instead of generating one, which is usually difficult to explain to a user."
"There are some issues with the interface that can be improved."
"It is challenging to obtain a comprehensive backup."
"SSO and MFA for improved end-user experience, and protection against password spray attacks, account password self-service."
"The ability or the options in the solution for changing the look and feel are not good enough because in our partner portal, essentially what they have is an ugly admin interface."
Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is ranked 5th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 52 reviews while Okta Workforce Identity is ranked 4th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 56 reviews. Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is rated 8.0, while Okta Workforce Identity is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiAuthenticator writes "A reasonably priced solution that can be scaled toward different functionalities and offers flexible SMS messaging". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Okta Workforce Identity writes "Extremely easy to work with, simple to set up, and reasonably priced ". Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiToken, Fortinet FortiNAC, Cisco Duo and ManageEngine Password Manager Pro, whereas Okta Workforce Identity is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Google Cloud Identity, SailPoint IdentityIQ, Saviynt and Google Cloud Platform Cloud Identity-Aware Proxy. See our Fortinet FortiAuthenticator vs. Okta Workforce Identity report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors and best Authentication Systems 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.