Red Hat Single Sign On Reviews

Earlier, customers used to authenticate the user before they used the application. With the help of Single Sign On, the customer logs in and uses all of the customer's applications without authenticating every time.

Red Hat Single Sign-On has a limited capacity, meaning you might not need any other product for a small user base. It works well for user numbers up to a thousand. Red Hat Single Sign-On provides everything you need to get started. There is a steep learning phase for integration.

The solution is flexible and has the same basic capabilities right out of the box. The most important feature of this product is that it is a Red double-sided product. One side is a well-known open-source project; the other is a Red Hat commercial product. The commercial product benefits from all the experience and contributions of the community, making it a very well-developed product.

Red Hat publishes much more and communicates its actions and plans. They could provide words, maps, and other resources. 

Scalability could be improved, too. It could provide more documentation.

I have been using Red Hat Single Sign On since 2015. We are using V7.6 of the solution.

The solution is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.

You can scale it to more than one million users. We have about 30- 40 customers using this solution. A couple of large customers have more than a million users signed on, and a few have fewer than a thousand users.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven out of ten.

If you have a problem with this product, you can search for solutions on Red Hat Single Sign-On's community forums and resources, where you will find many contributions from the community.

Neutral

I set up Red Hat Single Sign-On in half an hour. I had to install a single sign-on solution for a customer. I reviewed a list of all available products, which were no more than fifty, and analyzed them. I chose it because it was convincing, modern, and based on technology from 2015. I put my trust in this product, and after nine years, I feel confident in my decision.

Deploying this solution usually takes half an hour. You need an operating system running, then deploy the packages and prepare the interfaces.

I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

We need to differentiate a little bit. We have the community product and the commercial product. The commercial support is quite good. The community is different, and there is no official support. However, the community can provide new information on how to solve a problem. So far, we haven't had any problems that we couldn't solve within a couple of days.

A small customer can manage everything using only this product since all the operations and management are manual. For larger customers, it's better to implement a user lifecycle management system

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten,

We use Red Hat Single Sign On for login and password security.

The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to assign only one password for the user at a false value.

The product’s technical support services could be better. Additionally, they should add complimentary software security versions.

We have been using Red Hat Single Sign On for three to five years.

It is a stable platform. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable platform. I rate its scalability a ten out of ten. We did POCs for 30,000 users last month.

The product’s initial setup process was easy for us.

The product generates a return on investment.

Red Hat Single Sign On is expensive. There are similar local solutions available at low-cost.

I recommend Red Hat Single Sign On to others and rate it a ten out of ten.

I use Red Hat SSO for security and application authentication.

Red Hat SSO integrates well with our other solutions. Using OIDC protocols and ITL integration, employees can authenticate with Red Hat SSO and access our microservices. 

Red Hat SSO's architecture could be updated.

I have used Red Hat SSO since 2019. 

Red Hat SSO is stable. 

Red Hat SSO is highly scalable. It's easy to increase the capacity using the OpenShift portal.

Red Hat's support is excellent. 

Red Hat SSO is deployed to an OpenShift container. It was effortless to install and configure. 

Red Hat SSO is affordable. It's included with our OpenShift subscription, so it's an excellent value. 

I rate Red Hat Single Sign-on 10 out of 10. It's an excellent solution that uses all the primary security protocols.

The primary use case of this solution is for single sign-on for a set of applications that we had developed. I'm a solutions architect. 

I like that the solution is open source and you can use a commercial edition of it without any charge. The professional version or the enterprise edition was very reasonably priced and it provided most of the features that other enterprise editions provided. It was a lot more extensible. There was good support for some of the latest protocols, like single sign-on protocols for features such as OpenID Connect.

I think they could provide additional features in terms of users trying to manipulate the system with regard to security. Some of the paid systems on cloud offer many of the similar features in terms of tracking unauthorized logins and so on, or revealing attempts to break into the system. Other solutions have more intelligence in terms of tracking such attempts and I think Red Hat should do the same.

I've been using this solution for two years. 

I think the solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

I would recommend this solution and rate it seven out of 10. 

We have our suite of applications and are using this product to integrate with most of the enterprise solutions or the identity providers solutions for authentication. Therefore, we are using it for authentication and single sign-on. For example, we are using the OpenID Connect protocol for authentication and receiving identity tokens from solutions.

We wanted to test a single sign-on solution, which we can build up on, then later possibly provide as a solution to our customers. 

We started off with the community edition for our own uses. The community edition has an open source community, and the product over there is named Keycloak. We started off using the 3.4.3 version, then we went for the paid subscription. That is when we bought the Red Hat Single Sign On version 7.2. Version 7.2 has been enough for us as a single sign-on product.

We do not use it directly with any of our company functions, since our enterprise has Microsoft licenses.

• Red Hat SSO has a lot of very concise, well laid out documentation, which is available in the free edition as well.
• It is fast and effective.
  
• It is very easy to scale and use as you want. 
• It provides a single pane of glass if you have deployed it across multiple clusters.
• The product keeps to standardized SSO protocols, so it would be easy switch to another SSO, if needed.
• It provides good tool tips.
• It allows for a lot of customization, such as, federation. 
• It provides you endpoints as plugins or you can write on your own.
• It integrates well with social logins, like Facebook, Yahoo, and Google Identity.

Red Hat is creating a SaaS/cloud solution with their own authorization. They are looking to support it with adapters, but I am not sure how well this product will integrate with other Windows products.

They could provide more checks and balances to find out if there have been any security lapses, e.g., if somebody is trying to break into the system. Some other products have these detection mechanisms in case someone is trying to hack into the system or find out a user's passwords. 

I would like them to add audit reports. Other cloud-based solutions have good audit functionalities, such as:

• How many times a user has attempted to log in? 
• How many times there have been failed logins?
• What is the general usage? 
• How long a particular user remains active during a day or once they are logged in?

These are good audit features to have in an enterprise setup in case of security breaches. This particular feature needs to be added or extended in the current product.

It is a very stable product. We have 99.9 percent uptime.

If you want to set it up for a highly available configuration, then you need to have two to three people maintaining it. One person should be an IT person, ideally. The other person should have knowledge of the product and database configuration.

It is definitely scalable. Though, we don't have a large user base who will be using the solution. Right now, we have this deployed at one customer location.

You can deploy it across various data centers and manage them all from one data center using a central administrator's interface, where the changes will reflect across all of the data centers.

If you want support, that is when you use the paid version. There are different support categories that you can pay for, which provide different support levels. E.g., there is a quick response if you pay a higher amount, where the response time is within a few hours.

I believe the customer was using a Microsoft solution that was outdated and beyond the support lifecycle.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. You can set it up and login. The process is pretty smooth.

The deployment took about two to three days, once we were ready with the implementation.

We automated the deployment with automated scripts. The only thing that needed to be set up manually was the configuration by us.

It is a low cost product. This product can be used by non-profit organizations or universities, when they don't want to invest a lot of money. 

The license is around $8000 USD. I found these costs reasonable.

If you go for a cloud solution, most of the subscriptions are based on the number of users who are going to be using it. E.g., the number of identities which you will be creating for the number of logins per month.

We also evaluated Okta. However, we were looking for a more cloud-based solution. Though, Okta is good for customization.

A costly product will not always save you from a security breach. SSO provides good protection at a low cost.