We performed a comparison between ForgeRock and IBM Security Verify Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity Management (IM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its best feature is definitely the process design. It is quite easy and straightforward to design a process."
"The best feature in Omada Identity is that it enables us to implement standardized employee life cycle processes so that we don't have to create them ourselves. We can then use the standard workflows. The breadth and scope of the solution’s IGA features also fulfill our requirements."
"We are able to onboard new user accounts much faster by automating the process and standardizing our operations globally. Previously, there were many individual processes and manual admin interactions. We also see a lot of cost savings and benefits because through automation and standardization."
"Omada offers a technical solution that addresses both our needs."
"You can make resources. You can import them from Azure or Active Directory and put them in an application. For example, if there is an application that uses a lot of Active Directory groups, you can make the groups available for people. If they need to access that application, you can tell them the resource groups you have for that application. People can do everything by themselves. They do not need anybody else. They can just go to the Omada portal, and they can do it all by themselves. That is terrific."
"User-friendly solution."
"The most valuable feature in Omada is the governance. We work with other products and other product vendors, but the sweet spot in the market for Omada is where things are heavy on governance."
"The customer success and support teams have been crucial."
"The support is good and prompt."
"The solution is very scalable. We have a lot of users that have been increasing over the years that we have been using it. We have approximately 20,000 users."
"Installation and configuration are pretty easy for ForgeRock OpenIDM."
"Even though we have very small business interests with them today, they see that we plan on growing drastically over the next two years. Therefore, we have excellent support and we are now at a point where we are not calling tech support. We pick up a phone and call the Account Manager and they'll get everything resolved for us. We don't have to queue along with everybody else and go through a long process."
"The solution integrates well and it is important for them to keep up with the current trends in the market quickly enough, and they have been doing a good job at it."
"I like the intelligent authentication feature."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the authentication for the consumers. The integration with other third-party applications is excellent."
"We used it to implement multi-factor authentication and to improve our security posture as well as reducing the potential for attacks."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via email or SMS. This ensures secure access to your accounts by providing multiple authentication options."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Security Access Manager, at least for my company, is multi-factor authentication. That's the only feature my company is using. The solution works well and has no glitches. IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."
"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth. For legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users. From the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"The solution should be made more agile for customers to own or configure."
"When you do a recalculation of an identity, it's hard to understand what was incorrect before you started the recalculation, and which values are actually updated... all you see are all the new fields that are provisioned, instead of seeing only the fields that are changed."
"The reporting and importing have room for improvement."
"If you find an error and you need it fixed, you have to upgrade. It's not like they say, "Okay, we'll fix this problem for you." You have to upgrade. The last time we upgraded, because there was an error in a previous version, we had to pay 150,000 Danish Krone (about $24,000 at the time of this review) to upgrade our systems... That means that we have to pay to get errors fixed that Omada has made in programming the system. I hope they change this way of looking at things."
"Omada could make it a bit more convenient to send emails based on events automatically. Having that functionality is critical for us to maintain transparency."
"I would like to see them expand the functionality of the tool to continue to be competitive with the monsters out there. For example, they could add functionality on the authentication side, functionality that Octa and SailPoint have. But they should do that while maintaining the same simplicity that makes Omada a product of choice today."
"The security permission inside Omada needs improvement. It's tricky to set up."
"When making a process, you should be able to use some coding to do some advanced calculations. The calculations you can currently do are too basic. I would also like some additional script features."
"We raised tickets asking for improvements, but sometimes we don't get the proper solution. They are responding, but the ticket is open for weeks and weeks. For some issues, we don't get a satisfactory solution or the solution doesn't work."
"I find that it's quite expensive for just an open-source system. Support is quite expensive."
"Automatic Deployment needs improvement. it could be made easier."
"Lacks simplified documentation within the tool that requires use of a separate portal."
"The identity management model needs a bit of improvement."
"The solution could improve by adding more advertising and marketing."
"We're worried about the scaling. We're told it will be okay and there won't be issues, however, I'm not 100% convinced."
"The only problem with ForgeRock is that it is derived from an open-source product, so sometimes it's a bit unstable."
"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area. OIDC is a third-party integration that we do with the cloud platforms, and OAuth is an authorization mechanism for allowing a user having an account with Google or any other provider to access an application. Organizations these days are looking for just-in-time provisioning use cases, but IBM Security Access Manager is not very mature for such use cases. There are only a few applications that can be integrated, and this is where this product is lagging. However, in terms of configuration and single sign-on mechanisms, it is a great product."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"There are a lot of areas that can be improved, but the main area is the lack of customization. You cannot easily customize anything in the product. It is not easy to tweak the functionality. It is challenging to change the out-of-the-box functionality."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"The solution could be classified as a hilt system. There are a lot of resources being used and it is suitable for very large enterprises or the public sector."
ForgeRock is ranked 6th in Identity Management (IM) with 27 reviews while IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 17th in Identity Management (IM) with 7 reviews. ForgeRock is rated 8.0, while IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ForgeRock writes "Governance and access management solution used for multi-factor authentication that is outdated with an unresponsive UI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "Supports on-prem and cloud environments, has good integration capabilities, and is easy to adopt". ForgeRock is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, PingID, Microsoft Entra ID, Auth0 and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Workforce Identity, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and PingID. See our ForgeRock vs. IBM Security Verify Access report.
See our list of best Identity Management (IM) vendors and best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Identity Management (IM) 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.
