We performed a comparison between IBM Security Verify Access and NetIQ Identity Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity Management (IM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The support response time and the freedom from strange bugs and strange things happening in the software are valuable."
"The identity lifecycle support is definitely valuable because we are a complex organization, and there is a lot of onboarding, movement, and offboarding in our organization. We have 31,000 users, and there are a lot of users who are constantly onboarding, offboarding, and moving. So, we need to make sure that these activities are supported. In old times, we used to do everything manually. Everyone was onboarded, offboarded, or moved manually. So, from a business point of view and an economics point of view, identity lifecycle is most valuable. From a security point of view, access review is the most important feature for us."
"The most valuable feature of Omada is its API connectivity, which allows seamless integration with various services like SAP, GRC, and Microsoft licenses."
"Omada Identity Suite has a very powerful workflow engine. It is used for requesting access for approval to everything that's around Access Management and for re-certification purposes."
"I'm not using Omada, but the interface is easy to use and gives you a solid overview of your identities."
"The key benefit of Omada Identity is maintaining complete control."
"The teams we work with at Omada provide great insights and support. Overall, it has been a pleasure working with them. That's the part we value the most."
"The Governance and self-service that can be set up so you can use them yourself to work in the system are the most valuable features. End users can be enabled to help themselves."
"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."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"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."
"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."
"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 like the eDirectory feature."
"The main value lies in the simplicity of implementation, as well as its customized look and feel."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most valuable features of NetIQ Identity Manager are the synchronization of different directories, such as Active Directory. We have many Active Directory systems, not only one."
"It's a very flexible tool, so you can synchronize multiple sources of data and you have multiple connections to various kinds of systems."
"The most valuable feature of this solution has been the ability for us to integrate a lot of external systems, and the automatic transfer of a lot of identity information. Additionally, the customization is very good."
"The most valuable features are Password Reset Alerts, Password Sync, and SQL connectors."
"The access request management has improved significantly in terms of its user interface. What sets it apart from competitors like SailPoint is that it's an event-based solution rather than schedule-based. That's a key differentiator."
"The solution should be made more agile for customers to own or configure."
"Functionality and usability could be improved."
"One thing that we are not so happy about is the user interface. It is a bit dated. I know that they are working on that, but the user interface is quite dated. Currently, it is a little bit difficult to customize the user interface to the need of the business, which is a little bit disappointing. It needs it to be a little bit easier to operate, and it should have a better user interface."
"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."
"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 reporting and importing have room for improvement."
"We are still on Omada on-prem, but I understand that when Omada is in the cloud, you cannot send an attachment via email. We have some emails with attachments for new employees because we have to explain to them how to register and do their multi-factor authentication. All that information is in the attachment. People have to do that before they are in our system. We cannot give them a link to our Intranet and SharePoint because they do not yet have access. They have to register before that, so I need to send the attachments, but this functionality is not there in the cloud."
"I would like to search on date fields, which is not possible now."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"There's no huge thing missing, because it's already comprehensive. Now and then, however, there might be a minor issue."
"Areas for improvement are further enhancing the access granting process to reduce time and improve accuracy."
"If it could be operated in such a way that anybody could use it, with just the user interface, and there's no need for programming, then that would be a great improvement."
"The solution architecture is somewhat complex. For some components, the necessary resilience is not inherent."
"NetIQ Identity Manager could improve by updating the user portal, it is out of date."
"We have another system that is using the SAML system, and we also integrate with Active Directory only. If NetIQ Identity Manager can integrate directly, we would not need to use the Active Directory directory."
"The integrations must be made easier."
"The interface is old and outdated, and the design software seems archaic."
IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 17th in Identity Management (IM) with 7 reviews while NetIQ Identity Manager is ranked 15th in Identity Management (IM) with 17 reviews. IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8, while NetIQ Identity Manager is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "Supports on-prem and cloud environments, has good integration capabilities, and is easy to adopt". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetIQ Identity Manager writes "If it works, Designer is a charm, but it can be a pain to keep updated". 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, whereas NetIQ Identity Manager is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Microsoft Identity Manager, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Microsoft Entra ID and RSA SecurID. See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. NetIQ Identity Manager report.
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.
