For those considering implementation, if your needs align with traditional MFA or Symantec's Advanced Authentication, it's a highly recommended choice due to its stability and scalability. However, if you seek a more modern MFA solution with extensive user flexibility, such as passwordless options or pattern-based authentication, Symantec may not be the ideal fit. Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

I rate Symantec Advanced Authentication a seven out of ten. 

We have at least two to three customers using this solution, both of which are reasonably big-sized customers. Some customers have it for about 5,000 to 10,000 servers. 

To those considering implementing this solution, I would advise them to look at what their requirements are. If they want to integrate their active directory, if they want to have an integration with their exchange or application to enable multi-factor authentication, then they need to look into design because architecture is important. Sometimes you can do an architectural level integration at the firewall end, at the load balancer area, and do it in one shot for all applications, rather than going at silos and installing one application, and doing multi-factor authentication for each application. It depends on architecture, so when you are selecting a product, you have to make sure that you do the right architecture. 

Make sure you understand the up-front costs and the ongoing cost structure. Users are billed when they are built into the portal, so also make sure your users enroll right away.

I think one thing I would say would be to make sure you test all of your use cases against Arcot. Make sure you understand the enrollment process, the de-enrollment process, understand how to authenticate use cases, and ensure that it covers everything that you need.

For this type of product it has to be able to handle a sufficient customer base. You have to take the traffic load into consideration, will it take the capacity.

I give it an eight out of 10 because we had a few glitches during the database connections, during installation, so I was not happy with it.

Check that it can handle your database first, before you get into the product.

I would suggest that others first analyze their backend systems very well. Make sure that the backend systems are a good fit with the new product that they are buying.

When selecting a vendor, I look for technical knowledge. This is the first thing that our bank analyzes. The second thing, as always, is the price.

It is quite buggy, so I would be careful with the product.

If you just need basic 2-factor, it fills the bill. Where we get our value is the risk-evaluation and those additional protections.

Make sure you have all your requirements identified and really think about what you're trying to accomplish. A lot of times, we'll have a problem and we'll already have a solution in mind. And, "How do we make this fit this?" Versus "Well, what do we actually need to get done?" And build all that out first. Then talk to your support team like, "Well, here's what we're trying to do." And then maybe get their feedback because sometimes they'll have a different idea of what you should be doing with your portfolio instead of trying to, "Well, I've got this square peg here, and this is kind of roundish but I think I can actually hit it hard enough, I can make it work." They may have something that's a little rounder for you and give you some of the same things that you're trying to look for.