Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Entrust Identity Enterprise vs Symantec Advanced Authentication comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Entrust Identity Enterprise
Ranking in Authentication Systems
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (11th)
Symantec Advanced Authentic...
Ranking in Authentication Systems
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.7
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of Entrust Identity Enterprise is 1.4%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Advanced Authentication is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

Iwegbue Godspower Isioma - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides strong authentication feature, which requires users to enter a one-time password (OTP)
The main issue I've noticed pertains to setting up the desktop client on virtual machines in Azure, GCP, or AWS, specifically for Entrust Identity Enterprise intended for on-premises use. It works for on-premises, but I'm not sure if it's fully supported in cloud environments. If support were added, it would function perfectly with on-premises configurations. So, 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.
Umair (Abu Mohaymin) Akhlaque - PeerSpot reviewer
Ensures robust security features and ease of deployment, although it may lack some of the more modern authentication options
There has been a need for aggressive development to modernize the product and align it with contemporary security requirements. While the rebranding has been a step forward, further enhancements are essential to meet the evolving demands of the market. It lacks features such as ActiveSync Exchange security, and it doesn't offer alternatives like password-less authentication via biometrics or patches. While Symantec mainly relies on traditional token-based or password-based methods, newer authentication methods are missing from its repertoire. Support services often lack promptness and depth of knowledge, leaving customers waiting for weeks to resolve issues. In the realm of multifactor authentication, swift resolution of problems is critical, as any slowdown or interruption can significantly impact operations. Urgent improvement is necessary to ensure that support responses are faster and more effective, aligning with the demands of MFA implementation.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"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."
"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."
"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."
"The integration matrix of the solution is huge compared to others."
"It is a scalable solution. You can add users and credentials without problems."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is that it's a strong authentication solution that's able to integrate with applications."
"Rules on Risk Authentication are very good."
"One of the most valuable aspects is its remarkable stability."
"It tells us exactly what we want in terms of authentication to various applications and provides protection for users who access them."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"The product is very costly compared to other alternative solutions."
"I would like to improve the tool's implementation and pricing."
"We have seen quite a few issues with bugginess. It is indeed pretty buggy and we have had to install some fixes."
"Advanced Authentication talks about the Device ID. But how the device ID is captured, I want to know more about that."
"Urgent improvement is necessary to ensure that support responses are faster and more effective, aligning with the demands of MFA implementation."
"This solution could be improved with risk-based authentication. I think that this product has everything that most customers are looking for, but modern technology has people looking for security tools with risk-based authentication, which they have a separate tool for. If they could integrate this, it would improve Symantec Advanced Authentication. They have to look at what's newly trending and how things are moving forward, and then adapt and adopt those features. Symantec's technical support should also be improved, in terms of response time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The subscription could be yearly or monthly, depending upon your choice."
"It's worth the money."
"I would rate the product's pricing a five out of ten."
"The price is reasonable."
"There are eventually going to be implementation costs. Sometimes you're required to have custom code developments there, so that has to be part of the implementation price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Entrust IdentityGuard?
The main issue I've noticed pertains to setting up the desktop client on virtual machines in Azure, GCP, or AWS, specifically for Entrust Identity Enterprise intended for on-premises use. It works ...
What is your primary use case for Entrust IdentityGuard?
I use it for an extra layer of security, that is two-factor authentication (2FA).
What advice do you have for others considering Entrust IdentityGuard?
I would recommend it. I've used it for three years now, and I'm very happy with it. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.
What do you like most about Symantec Advanced Authentication?
One of the most valuable aspects is its remarkable stability.
What needs improvement with Symantec Advanced Authentication?
There has been a need for aggressive development to modernize the product and align it with contemporary security requirements. While the rebranding has been a step forward, further enhancements ar...
 

Also Known As

IdentityGuard
CA Advanced Authentication, CA Strong Authentication, CA Risk Authentication, Arcot WebFort, Arcot RiskFort
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bank of New Zealand, CRISIL, Banco Mercantil, G_teborg University, Ministry of Economic Development of New Zealand, Ocean Systems, Skanska, Societe Generale, Susquehanna Bancshares
Global bank, Large Filipino Bank and SK Infosec
Find out what your peers are saying about Entrust Identity Enterprise vs. Symantec Advanced Authentication and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.