We performed a comparison between Gemalto Protiva and RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SailPoint, One Identity and others in Identity Management (IM)."The thing that I find most valuable is that Omada consists of building blocks, which means that you can configure almost anything you want without using custom code, making it pretty easy to do. It's possible to connect to multiple target systems and to create one role that consists of different permissions in the different target systems. So one role in Omada can make sure that you have an account in three different systems."
"The key benefit of Omada Identity is maintaining complete control."
"Omada's best feature is creating accounts, automatically assigning permissions, and distributing resources based on assignment policies."
"For me, the best feature of Omada Identity is its web interface because it's really easy for users to understand."
"The customer success and support teams have been crucial."
"Two valuable features of Omada Identity are the ability to discover accounts and link them to identities, and the automatic disabling of inactive accounts or identities."
"User-friendly solution."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is that it is Microsoft-based and it supports all Microsoft technology."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to use Active Directory groups as virtual containers instead of domains because it means that we can control our access groups better."
"The most valuable feature is the security, in particular, the One Time Password support."
"The data collection is excellent and easy to do. It does not require a lot of configuration nor does it require rules to be written like other competitors do."
"Roles, connectors for provisioning and re-accreditation or reviews help greatly to govern user access."
"With the tool in place, you need to hire fewer people to provide access, and you have control over your processes."
"RSA Identity Governance and lifecycles are good for the access certification and auditing sections."
"Improved traceability would be helpful for administrators. For example, let's say a user's permission is being revoked. We can only see the system that has carried out a particular action but not what triggered it. If an event definition or something has changed in the criteria for the permission being removed or something like that, we don't have immediate access to that information. It takes a little detective work."
"The UI design needs improvement. One or two years ago, Omada changed its user interface to simplify, but the simplification has not really kicked in."
"I am not working with the product, but they have this BI tool for role-based mining, and I think that should be included in the core product rather than an add-on."
"I would like to see them expand the functionality of the tool to continue to be competitive with the monsters out there. For example, they could add functionality on the authentication side, functionality that Octa and SailPoint have. But they should do that while maintaining the same simplicity that makes Omada a product of choice today."
"The web GUI can be improved."
"The Omada Identity SaaS version doesn't provide all the features Omada Identity on-premise provides."
"The backend is pretty good but the self-service request access screen, the GUI, needs improvement. It's an old-fashioned screen. Also, Omada has reports, but I wouldn't dare show them to the business because they look like they're from 1995. I know they are working on these things and that’s good, because they’re really needed."
"If you find an error and you need it fixed, you have to upgrade. It's not like they say, "Okay, we'll fix this problem for you." You have to upgrade. The last time we upgraded, because there was an error in a previous version, we had to pay 150,000 Danish Krone (about $24,000 at the time of this review) to upgrade our systems... That means that we have to pay to get errors fixed that Omada has made in programming the system. I hope they change this way of looking at things."
"The user interface needs improvement."
"Every connector that you have in the product needs to be custom-built, so there are not a lot of standard connectors available in the product, because of which there are a lot of hidden consultancy costs."
"The user interface and workflow need improvement, and more connectors would help."
"RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle could improve out-of-the-box customization."
"If you use the appliance version then it won't handle a huge database volume."
"Technical support in Pakistan can be improved."
"There are scalability issues. This product does not scale very well. It is not a good product for load balancing / active–active architecture."
"This product is missing a lot of features which other competitors are providing. One of the key features that are missing right now is risk scoring. Additionally, there is not much scope for customization - everything is hard-coded and predefined, so it does not allow the developers to make many modifications."
More RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Gemalto Protiva doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Identity Management (IM) while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is ranked 23rd in Identity Management (IM) with 9 reviews. Gemalto Protiva is rated 7.6, while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is rated 6.8. The top reviewer of Gemalto Protiva writes "Strong authentication permits our organization to improve security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle writes "Lacking customization, poor support, but useful auditing". Gemalto Protiva is most compared with , whereas RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Saviynt, One Identity Manager, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine).
See our list of best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all Identity Management (IM) 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.