Single Sign-On (SSO) Forum

User with 1,001-5,000 employees
Apr 30 2018
I would like to receive the pros and cons about IBM Tivoli Access Manager (IBM Security Access Manager and CA SSO (CA SiteMinder).
Content Specialist
IT Central Station
Apr 26 2018
One of the most popular comparisons on IT Central Station is Auth0 vs Okta. One of the users on our site says about Auth0, " It's more efficient than regular session management through a database because I only request profile data when needed." Another user says about Okta, "We are able to deploy solutions rapidly and also have a better idea on licensing as we can easily see who has access, who has been accessing and also who is not using an app" In your opinion, which is better and why? Thanks!
Ace SwerlingI can’t comment on Auth0 but I have decent experience with Okta. I believe Okta is really good at facilitating SSO to SaaS applications for internal users, especially those in AD. It’s not very good at anything else. Okta will make certain claims about things like SSO for customer portals, custom UIs, account provisioning, and connections to databases. They can technically do these things, but only with a substantial amount of custom development. We also discovered Okta will do single sign-on to applications but won’t do single sign-out. To that end, I recommend caution to understand exactly what you need and cross-reference that with Okta’s actual capabilities. Don’t necessarily take the sales team at their word when they claim something can be done. Check with an Okta technical architect to understand exactly what you’re looking at. Also, if you’re using Okta professional services to implement, make sure there’s handoff from the sales team. I’ve seen several examples where scope was agreed to by Okta sales and no communication was made to Okta services. Watch this process carefully to ensure you get what you want, and don’t be surprised if Okta comes back later and asks for more money for things they say is out of scope.
Kumar SingAuth0 has a lot more UI polish and serverless support and is more developer-friendly. The Auth0 offering support a wide range of scenarios and use cases, while Okta... With the open APIs, Okta is easy to implement. We were able to implement major services very quickly. Okta is the front end for WorkDay, ServiceNow, WebEx, Jabber and many more. Okta also replace ADFS and is the front end for the MS products (Office).Overall, both solutions mostly get the job done, but I prefer Auth0 for its elegance and simplicity and I really like my experience with Auth0
RandyBoggessFor me, it boils down to cost and 'need'. Okta is definitely the heavy hitter in the market and provides a lot of 'rich enterprise' capabilities to simplify deployment, integration, and audit capabilities but they come at a 'price' ($$). Auth0 can certainly do the job but will require a little more TLC and can get burdensome for large environment... the trade-off though is it is substantially more economical. If your needs are straight-forward and there's not a lot of complexity or scale to worry about, then Auth0 can suffice... If you have a large, complex environment and need 'simple' and cost is justifiable, then Okta is your choice...
User with 1,001-5,000 employees
I would like to know the pros & cons of CA SiteMinder and IBM Tivoli Access Manager products.
Jacob Nutahttps://www.itcentralstation.com/products/comparisons/ca-sso_vs_ibm-tivoli-access-manager
Konrad De GrootWe worked with NetIQ from Micro Focus. One platform to manage all your SSO solutions. Also good option to migrate to the new SSO solution. https://www.netiq.com/solutions/identity-access-management/single-sign-on.html

Sign Up with Email