We performed a comparison between Auth0 and CyberArk 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."I simply use the JWT from the client on the server side to process requests and push updated profile data to a database/queue as needed and end the process without having to persist data in the web server (sessions)."
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"It is very scalable because it provides a new environment for companies based on their number of users and other factors. The tool can take a lot of users."
"It's a very powerful platform. It has the ability to do the usual stuff, according to modern protocols, like OIDC and OAuth 2. But the real benefit of using the platform comes from its flexibility to enhance it with rules and, now, with what they call authentication pipelines. That is the most significant feature, as it allows you to customize everything regarding the authentication and authorization process."
"The most important thing for me is compliance. Everything that they have developed in Auth0 is already certified by many regulators such as ISO. So, we do not need to take care of that. We have the shared responsibility model to share assets with other products we are using in the cloud."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is interface application integration, but we haven't fully used it yet. We'll need it in the future for a few potential clients."
"It supports identity federation, FSO and multi-tenancy."
"The solution helps with auditing, and monitoring, and integrates with Splunk for log analysis. User activity logs are captured in CyberArk Identity and sent to external tools like Splunk for analysis and monitoring."
"The setup, via cloud, is simple."
"The most valuable features of CyberArk Identity are its ability to control access to administrative staff."
"I like the RBAC (Role-Based Access Control). It basically involves defining various roles, and then simply assigning those roles to users."
"The user self-service program and the Office 365 provisioning service feature are the most valuable. It is a very easy and feature-rich solution that gives priority to the users and security."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"The user identification is simplified, and managing user privileges, whether adding or revoking them, is also quite straightforward when utilizing CyberArk SaaS."
"The tool helps with authentication. It acts as an MFA for any kind of privileged access that occurs in our organization."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"There is a possibility to improve the machine-to-machine authentication flow. This part of Auth0 is not really well documented, and we could really gain some additional knowledge on that."
"There are indeed areas where the product could improve. For instance, Okta offers various application configurations, enabling access management, which the tool could consider implementing."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"The tool's price should be improved."
"I think they can do a better job in explaining what you're supposed to do next in order to correctly follow an idiomatic approach to using the solution beyond simply passing a JWT token to a server and having the server check then signature to validate the token."
"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"More integrations would be better."
"They could improve their UI and make everything more user-friendly."
"There is room for improvement in documentation. The documentation could be more specific about the changes needed to achieve specific goals."
"I'm not sure what needs improvement. It is a good platform."
"The product needs to leverage the cloud more, especially in the financial sector, where cloud adoption might be limited. Proper reporting within the cloud is essential. The tool should be more user-friendly to expedite access for users. The current agent-based system poses challenges if a user loses access to the server, making tasks difficult to perform. It should also improve technical support."
"In terms of a governance platform, it's worth noting that CyberArk doesn't offer a particularly strong one."
"The user interface could be improved."
"The solution's difficulty in gaining skill sets should be improved because it's a vertical product."
Auth0 is ranked 3rd in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 14 reviews while CyberArk Identity is ranked 9th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 17 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.2, while CyberArk Identity is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Auth0 writes "Has good documentation but improvement is needed in MFA and application configurations ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CyberArk Identity writes "Allows Linux and Unix administrators to login with single password ". Auth0 is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access and ForgeRock, whereas CyberArk Identity is most compared with Microsoft Intune, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Microsoft Entra ID, SailPoint IdentityIQ and PingFederate. See our Auth0 vs. CyberArk Identity report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors and best Access Management 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.
