We performed a comparison between Oracle Identity Governance and SailPoint IdentityIQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two User Provisioning Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has a very user-friendly interface compared to what we are used to, and it is highly configurable. In the old solution, when we needed to do something, we had to have a programmer sitting next to us, whereas, in Omada Identity, everything is configurable."
"The most valuable aspects of Omada Identity for me are the automation capabilities."
"The administrative features and SoD are valuable."
"We used to have a problem where an employee's access wasn't terminated when they left the company. Now, we have much better visibility into and control over who has access."
"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."
"What I like most is that we can always find a solution, and we can also find the cause when something goes wrong. I like that the most because everything is in one way or another traceable. That is what I like most. I like its reliability."
"The benefits of Omada Identity include a holistic way of viewing access, the ability to give people access, and automation."
"Omada's most valuable aspect is its usability."
"Its most valuable feature is its scalability."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible automation functionality which has optimized our user access privilege management. This has allowed us to create and delete user accounts more accurately and efficiently. This feature has enabled us to save time and resources needed to perform mundane manual tasks."
"The most important feature is the connectors. Without the connectors, it can do nothing."
"OIM in my organization has improved its use and dependability, allowing us to pass audit each time."
"It's a stable and scalable solution."
"The one thing that stands out was is the automatic sign-out when an employee goes on vacation. Identity Governance can monitor when an employee goes on vacation and returns. We use this feature to automatically disable all the employee's accounts when they go on vacation, and they're automatically enabled when they come back."
"Scalability-wise, I rate this solution a nine out of ten. Oracle Identity Governance is a scalable solution, without a doubt."
"It helps provision the required accesses through policies, approvals, and whatever would be the business requirement."
"This solution has made our team more effective. We need less manual approvals when someone new joins our company. There is less paperwork and fewer support tickets raised for access."
"It is simple and easy to implement."
"SailPoint IdentityIQ has a good and straightforward user interface. They also have a lot of resources and documentation available to understand the process."
"One of the most valuable aspects of SailPoint is its open integration interface."
"The most selling modules for SailPoint are the compliance manager and the life cycle manager."
"The level of customization for data imports and role modeling, because it helps to integrate faster, support easier and let it reuse the organization role structure."
"I like IdentityIQ's granular attachment management and certification customization features."
"The solution is pretty stable and simple to use."
"There is room for improvement in Omada's integration capabilities, particularly in streamlining complex integrations and enhancing programming logic for better rule management."
"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."
"The reporting and importing have room for improvement."
"The reporting on the warehouse data and the import process both have room for improvement."
"The security permission inside Omada needs improvement. It's tricky to set up."
"If I had to name one thing, it would be the user interface (UI)."
"Omada could communicate better with us about the product roadmap. We haven't gotten any updates about it. The user interface is often a bit difficult to understand. It isn't optimized for small screens, so it doesn't display all of the information clearly, so users need to scroll a lot."
"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."
"t is too complex, has too many bugs, and is an immature product, even the best case, beta version."
"The development and the administration side could be a lot more intuitive and easier to use than it currently is, in terms of functionality and what it tries to achieve as a Single Sign-On entity for an enterprise environment."
"Pricing for Oracle Identity Governance could be improved. The setup process for the tool could also be faster."
"The user interface experience needs to be improved."
"The user-friendliness of Oracle Identity Governance can be improved compared to other products."
"The platform could be enhanced with additional features."
"The solution needs to improve its web interface in the next release."
"Oracle Identity Governance, particularly version 12c, can handle multiple scenarios, but for a regular user, I found the use cases not that extensive, so this is an area for improvement. The implementation process for Oracle Identity Governance is also a bit more complex than how you implement competitor products, and this is another area for improvement in the solution. Technical support for Oracle Identity Governance also needs some improvement. Another area for improvement in Oracle Identity Governance is its documentation. Currently, it's lacking when compared to SailPoint. What I'd like to see in the next release of Oracle Identity Governance is a bit more scope for AI-based Identity governance. If the solution has built-in intelligence, that will give it more leverage. Another feature I'd like to see in Oracle Identity Governance in the future is the option for managers to provide access to others via mobile devices or phones."
"We faced some issues while integrating the solution with a third-party tool."
"Regarding the scope for improvement in the solution, reporting is an area that can be a bit more UI-oriented."
"The UI of the solution could be more customizable so we could change the workflows to suit our needs."
"When it comes to queries and analysis, I find the reporting module to be very low, very simple."
"In the past, we had a lot of problems with SailPoint IdentityIQ, particularly in providing access and provisioning. There were some gaps in the operation of the solution because they were manual rather than automated, and the users and administrators were given access directly via Active Directory, and it wasn't appropriate for us at the time to use. In terms of integration, we could provide a more automated solution after a minimum number of years, but not in the SailPoint IdentityIQ platform, but there were problems in the registration, for example, with putting information inside ADP, but in general, we were able to solve those problems, and after implementing SailPoint IdentityIQ we had increased evaluations."
"The solution, in general, is quite expensive."
"The mover process for this solution could be improved."
"I would like for the next release to have a more user-friendly interface."
Oracle Identity Governance is ranked 4th in User Provisioning Software with 66 reviews while SailPoint IdentityIQ is ranked 1st in User Provisioning Software with 61 reviews. Oracle Identity Governance is rated 7.4, while SailPoint IdentityIQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Oracle Identity Governance writes "A scalable solution designed to meet the requirements of medium and large-sized companies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SailPoint IdentityIQ writes "Flexible, easy to customize, and not too difficult to set up". Oracle Identity Governance is most compared with One Identity Manager, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Saviynt, Microsoft Identity Manager and ForgeRock, whereas SailPoint IdentityIQ is most compared with Saviynt, Microsoft Entra ID, One Identity Manager, ForgeRock and NetIQ Identity Manager. See our Oracle Identity Governance vs. SailPoint IdentityIQ report.
See our list of best User Provisioning Software vendors and best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all User Provisioning Software 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.
Here follow my inputs about your questions concerning SailPoint IQ and Oracle.
WHERE DOES IT COMES FROM?
1. As representatives of SailPoint told me in 2008, SailPoint IQ was designed in 2005 by reusing the functional and technical requirements of SocGen Corporate Investment Banking (I participated to the initial design in 2004 in Paris… we live in a small world).
2. Oracle Identity Governance was formerly RBAC X purchased by Sun Microsystems then selected as the Identity Analytics components by Oracle.
WHAT ARE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THAT?
Both solutions are based on the Role Based Access Control model (RBAC) consisting of telling who occupies some business roles to be granted more or less consistent list of authorizations.
This is a model of the second generation while the NIST envisioned up to 6 generations in 2009! So… it’s a pretty old model.
IF ONE ORGANIZATION SUCCEEDS TO MAKE IT WITH RBAC
If one succeeds to implement this model, then it is possible to tell:
1. Who should have access to what by occupying a role that has to be mined with a half automated process that is pretty laboring and expensive,
2. Who has ‘’out role’’ entitlements to be terminated. Reviews of entitlements can be focused on ‘’Out roles’’ and even if they don’t understand the descriptions of authorizations, managers can take a decision.
HEAVY PREREQUISITES TO MAKE IT
LABOR, TIME AND CASH BECAUSE OF HEAVY PREREQUISITES
If one large organization is willing to satisfy the core prerequisite of these 2 solutions, it is necessary:
1. to spend 30 to 60 minutes for each department of an organization to mine User Roles and to associate a list of authorizations that are impossible to understand by any business analyst,
2. then spend about an hour with each manager to validate the roles and associated entitlements (impossible to understand by managers as well),
3. last but not least, implement the roles and lists of entitlements.
REAL USE CASE IN THE USA
Large organizations are totally unable to implement such an approach for following reasons:
1. ..X for example used SailPoint IQ and mined 1.500 roles instead of estimated 15.000 (low estimation),
2. ..X was unable to validate roles because managers could not understand labels of authorizations such as: ZZX00152, ZX215521, zz_top_group_senior,…
3. it would have been:
a. too long to make it for 126.000 employees / 10 team members in average = 12.600 work units located in about 100 countries * 30 minutes in average = 787 man days without vacations, travels, coordination!
b. too expensive:
i. 1 role analyst * 30 minutes in average * 80$ per hour * 12.600 units = 504.000$ for role mining only
ii. 1 role analyst + 1 manager * 220$ per hour * 12.600 units = 2.772 K$ for role validation
iii. Implementation of roles into IAM solution such as Oracle Identity Manager or IBM SIM is a technical thing that costs more…
IF ONE ORGANIZATION CANNOT MAKE IT BECAUSE MANAGERS DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT MEANS ‘’ZX023455``
SailPoint and Oracle have nice features to add translations to entitlements.
The thing is that where you have several ten thousand labels to translate…
* it takes time and lots of $ before to deliver.
* People around a table will take time to come to a shared understanding (if they are very motivated)
IF ONE ORGANIZATION CANNOT MAKE IT BECAUSE IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO TRANSLATE ‘’ZX023455``
* SailPoint proposes to use Risk Based approach and to add Risk Criteria to several ten thousands labels… (sic) to be considered from a Risk Standpoint…
* Oracle proposes to use indicators and requests and to let managers think about a decision to be taken thanks to dashboards and reports. Some kind of Business Intelligence.
WHAT IS THE OPTION?
1. ...X came to the conclusion that it was not possible to make it with SailPoint IQ alone. A custom algorithm is necessary to enhance SailPoint capabilities.
2. The Gartner Group exposed the issue for the last 3 years. Advanced analytics and Self Learning systems will make it.
3. We, at EasyPatternZ:
a. are the first to make it with Artificial Intelligence.
b. take about 5 seconds per work unit in average to deliver the answer to the question ‘’Who has access to what, why, whatever the circumstances’’ better and faster than any leader.
c. made it 3 times since 2013. The Federal Government of Canada will qualify it between April and July this year with 23.000 employees.
d. Are watched by USCIS.
My experience in IAM is with HPE Aruba ClearPass & Cisco ISE. A couple of other competing products, such as the ForeScout and Auconet products that were evaluated at a high level, but didn’t progress further.
I’m not at all familiar with Sailpoint IdentityIQ and Oracle Identity Governance and couldn’t provide any meaningful insight into either of them.
I am not an SC so my response is very salesy :).
Sailpiont is more of a next gen solution in the IAM space.
If an organization was a huge Oracle shop I would have them consider Oracle – if not I would be heading to Sailpoint.
*Sailpoint is as robust but does not have the legacy issues that Oracle has to deal with which makes it easier to implement/operate
Sailpoint will also be lower in price.
Basically the question is 'what will you achive ?'. I agree with the comment above, Oracle is known to have a high TCO due to complexity. The fact is also that Oracle claims to ease the end-user experience but this mean a mandatory extensive preparation in order to provide users with accurate and in context information. Sailpoint IIQ is probably easier to implement and indeed is efficient in respect of RBAC and ABAC or preferably some kind of hybrid modeling. Don't forget IAM needs a very good preparation (analysis, modeling, inventory, classification, process analysis etc.) From my experience, IIQ is able to respond to complex needs and is far cheaper than Oracle and this allows to invest in added value activities (extra licence). Sorry if this is not a factual response in terms of pros & conts between OIG and IIQ but IIQ is more affordable and from my point of view covers all needed capabilities to build a strong IAM solution.
I think at a high level, both are going to provide the same functions. You'll see the main differences in how one has to implement workflows, UIs, and rules. Where Oracle uses BPML, ADF and OES, respectively, SailPoint is more Java-centric, IMHO. I found OIG's SOD rule definition UI hard to use and some serious limitations in its hierarchal role model. I think SailPoint has surpassed OIG in its extensibility with the framework in its 7.0 release. I would definitely evaluate roadmap if you want to stay on-prem.