We performed a comparison between Auth0 and Symantec Siteminder based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Auth0, Okta and others in Access Management."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'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."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"It has a lot of customization and out-of-the-box features."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"The most valuable feature is that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"The Directory is secure. It's our user store, and it's important to keep our members safe. The product does well with that."
"You can quickly deploy the entire product with a basic config within couple of hours."
"It's agent-based. It's convenient to deploy and integrate."
"All of our applications get a point, click, and you are in, while we increase security at the same time."
"Symantec Siteminder Is both scalable and stable."
"IWA is an out-of-the-box feature. The SAML-based federation is standard for all tools. However, CA Single Sign-On has made the federation configuration way too simple and handy to set up and use."
"A valuable feature of Siteminder is the way it handles bulk traffic. The features it has, in terms of routing the traffic and load balancing, are good."
"Federation is valuable, for sure, because we have a lot of third-party vendors that we need to integrate with, and this is a turnkey solution in some ways."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"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."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"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."
"In the past, there was an issue with the multi-tenant where there wasn't the ability to manage them."
"The tool's price should be improved."
"An area Siteminder could improve on is that there are a few limitations, in terms of new protocols for OpenID. If I want to have different scopes, the features are limited. They also do not have APIs exposed, which is a major drawback. API is a feature I would like to see included in the next release."
"We are finding some compatibility issues. We're still working with CA on them."
"We're currently unable to find information about if the solution can do a full implementation with SQL. Some better and more accessible documentation for new users or those curious about the product would be helpful."
"The main thing is we do not have the traceability and good monitoring that CA can provide us to capture problems when they occur."
"In future releases, I would like to see maybe more capabilities with some more modern authentication."
"I think they need to integrate some of the newer types of authentication into the product. I'm not seeing the innovation when it comes to biometrics in the product."
"The support could be faster."
"I'd like to see a rework of the user directory configuration."
Earn 20 points
Auth0 is ranked 2nd in Access Management with 14 reviews while Symantec Siteminder is ranked 17th in Access Management with 69 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.2, while Symantec Siteminder is rated 8.0. 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 Symantec Siteminder writes "Easy to implement and customize and very stable". Auth0 is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access and ForgeRock, whereas Symantec Siteminder is most compared with PingFederate, ForgeRock, Okta Workforce Identity, PingID and Red Hat Single Sign On.
See our list of best Access Management vendors and best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.
