We performed a comparison between CyberArk Identity and IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, Auth0 and others in Single Sign-On (SSO)."The most valuable feature of CyberArk Identity is the adaptive interface."
"CyberArk Identity is a mature product."
"The integration capabilities, ability to integrate CyberArk into the overall IBB strategy of our current clients."
"I like the RBAC (Role-Based Access Control). It basically involves defining various roles, and then simply assigning those roles to users."
"The setup, via cloud, is simple."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It takes me up to an hour and a half."
"If anyone makes an error, or if an incident occurs by accident, the business will not be harmed as a result of this activity."
"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."
"The integration effort with the end application is quite straightforward and easy."
"Single Sign-On functionality is valuable because the core purpose of the product is to allow universal (or bespoke) SSO for application suites."
"SAML 2.0."
"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."
"The Verify feature: A push method which customers are going for."
"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."
"We would like to see an improvement in the ability to manage mobile devices."
"CyberArk Identity's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"They can include the Mobile Device Management (MDM) feature."
"The user interface could be improved."
"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."
"Looking at their roadmap, they have a broad grasp of the security features which the industry needs."
"The self-service portal needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
More IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CyberArk Identity is ranked 9th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 17 reviews while IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Single Sign-On (SSO). CyberArk Identity is rated 8.2, while IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CyberArk Identity writes "Allows Linux and Unix administrators to login with single password ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] writes "Reverse proxy means applications need only minimal changes to support SSO with ISAM". CyberArk Identity is most compared with Microsoft Intune, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Microsoft Entra ID, SailPoint IdentityIQ and PingFederate, whereas IBM Tivoli Access Manager [EOL] is most compared with .
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.