AWS IAM Identity Center vs Symantec Siteminder comparison

"The two most valuable features of IAM Identity Center are the security policy generation and automation in creating credentials."

"The features of AWS IAM Identity Center that I appreciate are single sign-on and multi-factor authentication, and we can manage all authentication aspects while integrating it with third-party applications."

"The most valuable features of AWS IAM Identity Center are role-based permissions and existing permissions templates."

"The organizational value of AWS IAM Identity Center is definitely significant, as it helps ensure that the least required permissions are given to users, thus preventing unnecessary access and reducing the risk of accidental deletions or changes."

"IAM Identity Center provides micro-level control over resources, services, and users, allowing organizations to grant specific access and privileges safely."

"The most valuable feature is the security configuration ease, which is great for me, especially as a beginner."

"The most valuable feature of AWS IAM Identity Center is the ability to provide a structured approach to access management through a single dashboard."

"The features of AWS IAM Identity Center that I appreciate are single sign-on and multi-factor authentication, and we can manage all authentication aspects while integrating it with third-party applications."

"All of our applications get a point, click, and you are in, while we increase security at the same time."

"The most valuable feature is the integration with the Active Directory."

"The Directory is secure. It's our user store, and it's important to keep our members safe. The product does well with that."

"You can quickly deploy the entire product with a basic config within couple of hours."

"It has considerably reduced the amount of time that new users would take to join into the organization. Previously, it was a lengthy, manual process because it's a very secure environment, where they need to verify the user before they can actually grant him a user-ID and password. Integrating with the built-in custom application, and exposing CA Single Sign On to the internet, we were able to get the employees onboard. The time that we gained was: previously it would generally take from four to eight weeks for each employee, we brought it to one to two days."

"The feature that I mostly valued is the ease of installation on different systems, especially on Windows."

"The most valuable feature is that it meets the requirements of the customer. You have a lot of features in the product. Every product has them, but the question is, are these products going to meet the requirement of the customer?"

"Right now, federation that comes out-of-the-box with single sign-on is the most valuable feature that we have, and also scalability."

"Greater visualization for security policies would be beneficial."

"IAM is challenging to manage in complex environments."

"The initial setup isn't very easy, around four on a scale of one to ten. It permits setting up policies that might not be entirely secure if improperly configured, which can lead to issues later."

"In the product, two groups cannot have the same name...In general, the tool does not allow for the duplication of names."

"There is a desire to see integration or adoption of time-based user creation features within AWS IAM Identity Center."

"Focusing on further allowing customization and flexibility in developing solutions as a solution architect or developer would enhance user experience."

"IAM is challenging to manage in complex environments. Enhancements could include automation tools or a centralized dashboard for managing roles and policies across multiple accounts, simplifying the process."

"I would like to see more flexibility in the features as sometimes it doesn't meet my expectations."

"I would like to see a move towards the newer technologies, which is what we are doing right now. I think that's in the roadmap that's coming, in the 12.8 and 14 releases, but we would like to have it sooner than later."

"The maintenance cost has increased significantly, and we are concerned about this."

"Symantec SiteMinder is not easy to set up and maintain at an infrastructure level."

"We would like to the OAuth be more stable, more issues being fixed rather than not."

"I'd like to see a rework of the user directory configuration."

"The main thing is we do not have the traceability and good monitoring that CA can provide us to capture problems when they occur."

"In future releases, I would like to see maybe more capabilities with some more modern authentication."

"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."

"The product is cheap since it is available on the cloud."

"The pricing is reasonable."

"The licensing is fair for this solution."

"I recommend conducting a PoC on every available product before choose one."

"The solution's pricing is competitive."

"CA solutions are generally expensive but for the customer the ROI is big."

"Symantec Siteminder is expensive; they could definitely do better on the price."

"The price is quite comparable to the other enterprise-level solutions in that market."

"Siteminder is a little costly. You pay for licensing, and they offer packages, so if you have less users, then you have to buy different products at different prices. If you have more of a user base, then the package is different. They also include other features—for example, if you have a database and you're using Siteminder, then it's good to use a Semantic-specific database, but if you are using less, then you have to purchase the database separately. Whereas if you are going for a bigger license, then it comes within the package. It depends on which plan you are using."