We performed a comparison between IBM Security Verify Access and Okta Workforce Identity 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."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."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"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."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"We find the solution to be stable."
"One of the most beneficial features of the solution is the user provisioning and the de-provisioning feature."
"This solution has a lot of capabilities and features."
"It is flexible and easy to install."
"It has a wide range of MFA options. I prefer "Okta Verify" out of them all."
"The support for YubiKey is really good because you don't actually have to type in your username and password."
"I am able to authenticate my users on cloud and SaaS applications such as Workday through Okta workflows."
"One of the features that I have found to be very valuable is its interoperability and compatibility with all types of resources, whether it's networking, infrastructure, or applications. That is, it is compatible as well as interoperable, as far as the federated authentication is concerned."
"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 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."
"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 user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"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."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"Okta Workforce Identity could improve provisioning it can be made simpler."
"Application updates are lacking. Customer support needs to be improved."
"The solution can be quite expensive."
"A room for improvement in Okta Workforce Identity is its price. It could be cheaper. The biggest benefit of the solution is that everything works securely without extra steps, so you're saving on your workforce's time and effort because your applications work smoothly and securely, but you'd need to pay some amount of money for that. Another area that could be improved, though not necessarily regarding Okta Workforce Identity, is the SSO applications because so many of the source applications charge extra money to put the SSO to work, which means you have to buy a more expensive license. Nowadays, SSO is a mainstream functionality and it should be out-of-the-box in those applications because it's so easy to set up."
"The only aspect in which it can be improved is that the interface could be cleaner. I found this even when I was trying to do my certification exam because the certification is hands-on. You find yourself fumbling around a little bit to find simple things. This happens even when you start to get familiar with the product."
"Its pricing needs improvement."
"The only area of concern in the solution stems from the fact that my company needs some help regarding the setup phase from a partner."
"There should be automated aggregation and complete classification processes included in it."
IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 13th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 7 reviews while Okta Workforce Identity is ranked 4th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 54 reviews. IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8, while Okta Workforce Identity is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "It has good UI and reliability, but it is challenging to customize the out-of-the-box functionality". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Okta Workforce Identity writes "Extremely easy to work with, simple to set up, and reasonably priced ". IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, ForgeRock, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and PingID, whereas Okta Workforce Identity is most compared with Google Cloud Identity, Microsoft Entra ID, SailPoint IdentityIQ, Saviynt and Cisco Duo. See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. Okta Workforce Identity report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors and best Access Management 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.