We performed a comparison between Auth0 and Symantec Siteminder based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Auth0, Okta and others in Access Management."I simply use the JWT from the client on the server side to process requests and push updated profile data to a database/queue as needed and end the process without having to persist data in the web server (sessions)."
"The most valuable feature is interface application integration, but we haven't fully used it yet. We'll need it in the future for a few potential clients."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"The most valuable feature is that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"The most important thing for me is compliance. Everything that they have developed in Auth0 is already certified by many regulators such as ISO. So, we do not need to take care of that. We have the shared responsibility model to share assets with other products we are using in the cloud."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"It has a lot of customization and out-of-the-box features."
"We almost never have outages nor see slowdowns."
"Authentication & Authorization are important because all the sites need authentication for security purposes. That has been handled pretty well all these years with SSO."
"It has the ability to authenticate and authorize users. It is the main feature for our security."
"Federation is valuable, for sure, because we have a lot of third-party vendors that we need to integrate with, and this is a turnkey solution in some ways."
"SAML is the best thing we're using right now because there is no need for creating an external account."
"It's agent-based. It's convenient to deploy and integrate."
"The solution is easy to use for our managers."
"It is very scalable. We have a very large customer base: 75 million customers."
"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"There are indeed areas where the product could improve. For instance, Okta offers various application configurations, enabling access management, which the tool could consider implementing."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"There is a possibility to improve the machine-to-machine authentication flow. This part of Auth0 is not really well documented, and we could really gain some additional knowledge on that."
"I think they can do a better job in explaining what you're supposed to do next in order to correctly follow an idiomatic approach to using the solution beyond simply passing a JWT token to a server and having the server check then signature to validate the token."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"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."
"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."
"We would like to the OAuth be more stable, more issues being fixed rather than not."
"In future releases, I would like to see maybe more capabilities with some more modern authentication."
"To add more value to this solution it needs to be more user-friendly."
"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."
"The technical support could be better."
"The GUIs are not very clear, especially when integrating with other products from CA."
Earn 20 points
Auth0 is ranked 2nd in Access Management with 14 reviews while Symantec Siteminder is ranked 17th in Access Management with 69 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.2, while Symantec Siteminder is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Auth0 writes "Has good documentation but improvement is needed in MFA and application configurations ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Siteminder writes "Easy to implement and customize and very stable". Auth0 is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access and ForgeRock, whereas Symantec Siteminder is most compared with PingFederate, ForgeRock, Okta Workforce Identity, PingID and Red Hat Single Sign On.
See our list of best Access Management vendors and best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.
