We performed a comparison between IBM Security Verify Access and Okta Workforce Identity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"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."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"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."
"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."
"It has a wide range of MFA options. I prefer "Okta Verify" out of them all."
"The initial setup is easy."
"This solution has a lot of capabilities and features."
"It's easy to use and straightforward."
"The product’s most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"The solution can scale very well."
"The feature that is most valuable to me is the automated user provisioning that we set up using Okta as a major part of that process."
"It is flexible and easy to install."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"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."
"Its pricing needs improvement."
"You can't hide the device when you're checking logs."
"The initial setup can be complex at first."
"It is challenging to obtain a comprehensive backup."
"Therefore, if you have 10 million users, that's almost 100 million, so it is costly."
"We still had to write several internal programs/scripts to complete the user-provisioning process. Okta does not have the ability to provision mailbox accounts for on-premise Exchange or in a hybrid O365 environment. The Group Push function from Okta to AD did not work reliably in our environment."
"The training is too costly."
"Okta Workforce Identity could improve provisioning it can be made simpler."
IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 13th in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) with 7 reviews while Okta Workforce Identity is ranked 2nd in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) with 59 reviews. IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8, while Okta Workforce Identity is rated 8.4. 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 Okta Workforce Identity writes "Extremely easy to work with, simple to set up, and reasonably priced ". IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, ForgeRock, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Ping Identity Platform, whereas Okta Workforce Identity is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Google Cloud Identity, SailPoint Identity Security Cloud, Saviynt and Symantec Siteminder. See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. Okta Workforce Identity report.
See our list of best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors, best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors, and best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) 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.