We performed a comparison between Frontegg and IBM Security Verify Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has Audit Log and many cool features that if we were to develop them by ourselves, it would require a lot of research and development resources. Frontegg gives us everything we need to ensure that our customers have a safe and reliable authentication system in which they can also manage some of the features and roles by themself which gives them more control over their environment."
"We like the SSO, permissions and roles, multiple workspaces, and react login components."
"The MFA policy via Frontegg allows us to enable/disable/enforce the Multi-Factor Authentication policy of our users and to enhance security and adhere to modern standards."
"Their developers were always willing to meet even though we are in very different time zones."
"The admin portal layer is super useful and saves valuable front-end development time."
"Every feature is multi-tenant by design, making different customer requests effortless to provide."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth. For legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users. From the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via email or SMS. This ensures secure access to your accounts by providing multiple authentication options."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Security Access Manager, at least for my company, is multi-factor authentication. That's the only feature my company is using. The solution works well and has no glitches. IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."
"The web interface is missing a way to delete a workspace. I have accidentally created a workspace and was not able to delete it. It's a minor thing that should be supported."
"We're hoping to see more user management-related features, according to Frontegg's roadmap."
"We really like the ability to add the same user across tenants. From a UX perspective, the flow can be betterized."
"The PHP SDK is limited. It's not a huge deal as we can just use their web API directly, but it is something to note if you're using PHP. "
"Frontegg is fairly stable, however, we are looking forward to some promised capabilities, such as more tightly integrated Feature Flag support."
"It would be nice to have a backup export with all tenant/users so that in case of a mistake we can have the option to restore the users."
"There are a lot of areas that can be improved, but the main area is the lack of customization. You cannot easily customize anything in the product. It is not easy to tweak the functionality. It is challenging to change the out-of-the-box functionality."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area. OIDC is a third-party integration that we do with the cloud platforms, and OAuth is an authorization mechanism for allowing a user having an account with Google or any other provider to access an application. Organizations these days are looking for just-in-time provisioning use cases, but IBM Security Access Manager is not very mature for such use cases. There are only a few applications that can be integrated, and this is where this product is lagging. However, in terms of configuration and single sign-on mechanisms, it is a great product."
"The solution could be classified as a hilt system. There are a lot of resources being used and it is suitable for very large enterprises or the public sector."
Earn 20 points
Frontegg is ranked 20th in Single Sign-On (SSO) while IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 14th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 7 reviews. Frontegg is rated 9.6, while IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Frontegg writes "Intuitive with reCaptcha integration and helpful technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "Supports on-prem and cloud environments, has good integration capabilities, and is easy to adopt". Frontegg is most compared with Auth0, Descope, Okta Customer Identity and Microsoft Entra ID, whereas IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Workforce Identity, ForgeRock, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. See our Frontegg vs. IBM Security Verify Access report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors.
We monitor all Single Sign-On (SSO) 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.
