We performed a comparison between Entrust Identity Enterprise and Microsoft Entra ID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Authentication Systems solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This solution is flexible and easy to use for our clients. We use it with different kinds of applications and integrate it with different processes."
"I am impressed with Entrust because they are one of the most advanced identity access management companies. Their portfolio of products is well aligned with the CISA zero trust framework. If you compare the features of Entrust products with the CISA pillars of zero trust, you'll see that they're perfectly matched with CISA requirements."
"It is a scalable solution. You can add users and credentials without problems."
"Entrust is an enterprise account, and they have a support system. Their training is also top-notch, and they are willing to share their knowledge with their partners."
"The integration matrix of the solution is huge compared to others."
"It's a very intuitive platform. It's easy to create groups and add people."
"It enhances security, especially for unregistered devices. It 1000% has security features that help to improve our security posture. It could be irritating at times, but improving the security posture is exactly what the Authenticator app does."
"It's definitely both stable and scalable."
"The security and infrastructure management features are the most valuable ones for us."
"I like the downloads, availability for Android and iOS operating systems, and integration with Microsoft applications, such as Azure- and Office-based solutions. It is an excellent tool that helps with day-to-day business operations. I also like that I can install the app on my mobile."
"The visibility and control for permission management are excellent."
"The cloud security part is very valuable. Security is the most important thing in today's world. With Azure Active Directory, there are some features that tell you how you need to improve your security level. It informs you if you set up certain policies, e.g., this is where my users sign in. It tends to let you know if your organization has been breached with this security set up. Therefore, it is easier to know when you have been breached, especially if you set up a Conditional Access policy for your organization."
"The most valuable feature is the single sign-on, which allows any application that is SAML or OAuth compatible to use Azure as an identity provider for seamless sign-in."
"It functions well on-premises, but integrating it with cloud services like AWS or Azure could be challenging. There are issues with cloud integrations, such as Azure, AWS, and GCP."
"I would like to improve the tool's implementation and pricing."
"We are introducing new processes and are migrating to a new version. Once we explore new functionalities, we'll be able to assess what could be improved."
"The product is very costly compared to other alternative solutions."
"The downside is that we now have all our eggs in one basket with Microsoft. We have this great authentication and single sign-on, but if Microsoft has an outage in North America or globally, on Outlook or Teams, we're dead in the water... We get some type of hiccup once a quarter."
"I think there is room for improvement with actually discussing, and advertising Microsoft as a an authenticator. Many people just get confused and use Google, and I think if Microsoft would make more of an effort to penetrate the market, that would be key."
"The cost of licensing always has room for improvement."
"The scalability of the solution is good."
"On-premise capabilities for information and identity management need improvement."
"We have a lot of freedom in using the Group Policy Objects and, although Group Policy Objects are part of Azure Active Directory, there are still a lot of things that can be improved, such as providing local admin rights to a user. There are various, easy ways that I can do that in the on-premises version, but in the cloud version, it is a bit difficult. You have to create a bunch of policies to make it work."
"Better deployment management and visibility functionality would be helpful."
"When we add some user groups, at times they will not be properly configured. Also, sometimes Azure AD is not aware of the group policy, like the control, device functions, and settings, in detail. For example, you cannot configure these settings through mobile devices. It doesn't provide the flexibility to do that. The other challenge is that a third-party application may provide access without authorization."
Entrust Identity Enterprise is ranked 9th in Authentication Systems with 7 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Authentication Systems with 190 reviews. Entrust Identity Enterprise is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Entrust Identity Enterprise writes "Provides strong authentication feature, which requires users to enter a one-time password (OTP) ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". Entrust Identity Enterprise is most compared with DigiCert PKI Platform, Cisco Duo, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, RSA Authentication Manager and Utimaco SecurityServer, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Yubico YubiKey and Cisco Duo. See our Entrust Identity Enterprise vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Authentication Systems vendors and best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Authentication Systems 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.
