We performed a comparison between IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] and Symantec Siteminder based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, Auth0 and others in Single Sign-On (SSO)."SAML 2.0."
"The Verify feature: A push method which customers are going for."
"The integration effort with the end application is quite straightforward and easy."
"OAuth 2 is now the de facto standard for API protection and scoped authorized delegation. IBM TAM now supports OAuth 2 and can act as fully compliant OAuth 2 authorization server."
"Single Sign-On functionality is valuable because the core purpose of the product is to allow universal (or bespoke) SSO for application suites."
"If you look at our organization, and really all financial institutions, we have a lot of legacy apps. So it really helps to get Single Sign-On."
"It is very scalable. We have a very large customer base: 75 million customers."
"We almost never have outages nor see slowdowns."
"The most valuable feature is the Federation part of Single Sign On, which is customizable and is easily integrated with any customer application or any third party application."
"The single sign-on is the solution's most valuable feature"
"I liked the debugging part. There are only two files (trace file and log file) that you need to look into while performing debugging, and the logs give you the exact info on where and what needs to be fixed."
"Right now, federation that comes out-of-the-box with single sign-on is the most valuable feature that we have, and also scalability."
"Ease of use is very good, for administrating it. It's very well known."
"The profiling element is incredibly robust, but also equally as complex, it requires an off-site course to be able to understand the context or the plethora of options available."
"Looking at their roadmap, they have a broad grasp of the security features which the industry needs."
"The self-service portal needs improvement."
"An Amazon Machine Image (AMI) for the newer appliance versions for hosting the virtual appliances on AWS will help."
"Multi-factor authentication with social integration needs to improve."
"I would prefer to see their SAML integration be a more streamlined and easier interface."
"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."
"All the problems that we reported actually have never been resolved. We could not capture enough information for CA to be able to debug the problem."
"Better documentation. I went through some sessions on single sign-on for version 12.7."
"The Federation part of CA Single Sign On, it's a bit complex to implement because it involves the SSL certificates, exchange of certificates, and lot of technical details. The documentation misses some important parts of this, so that's the reason it took some time for us to go live."
"The support could be faster."
"Some of the new protocols, like OAuth 2.0, could be improved."
"To add more value to this solution it needs to be more user-friendly."
More IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Single Sign-On (SSO) while Symantec Siteminder is ranked 17th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 69 reviews. IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Symantec Siteminder is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] writes "Reverse proxy means applications need only minimal changes to support SSO with ISAM". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Siteminder writes "Easy to implement and customize and very stable". IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Symantec Siteminder is most compared with PingFederate, ForgeRock, Okta Workforce Identity, PingID and PingAccess.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) 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.
