We performed a comparison between IBM Security Verify Access and RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle 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 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."
"We used to have a problem where an employee's access wasn't terminated when they left the company. Now, we have much better visibility into and control over who has access."
"The administrative features and SoD are valuable."
"Omada's user interface is elegant and easy to work with. I like Omada's ability to automatically generate accounts for new hires and allow them access to all required systems by established policies. Around 80 percent of workers can start working immediately on their first day without requesting further access."
"It has a lot of out-of-the-box features. It is flexible, and there are a lot of possibilities to configure and extend it. It is user-friendly. It has an interface that is end-user or business-user friendly."
"Omada's onboarding features reflect our processes for onboarding new employees well. That is the primary reason we use this solution. We use role-based access control. I'm not sure how much it has improved our security posture, but it's made managing identities more convenient."
"It has a very user-friendly interface compared to what we are used to, and it is highly configurable. In the old solution, when we needed to do something, we had to have a programmer sitting next to us, whereas, in Omada Identity, everything is configurable."
"The most valuable functionality of the solution for us is that when employees stop working for the municipality, they are automatically disabled in Active Directory. Omada controls that 100 percent. They are disabled for 30 days, and after that time Omada deletes the Active Directory account. The same type of thing happens when we employ a new person. Their information is automatically imported to Omada and they are equipped with the roles and rights so they can do their jobs."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"RSA Identity Governance and lifecycles are good for the access certification and auditing sections."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the security, in particular, the One Time Password support."
"With the tool in place, you need to hire fewer people to provide access, and you have control over your processes."
"When making a process, you should be able to use some coding to do some advanced calculations. The calculations you can currently do are too basic. I would also like some additional script features."
"In our organization, all the data is event-driven, which means that if an attribute is changed in the source system, it can be updated within a few seconds in all end-user systems. There is room for improvement in Omada regarding that. Omada is still batch-based for some processes, so sometimes it can take an hour or even four hours before the execution is run and the update is sent."
"The security permission inside Omada needs improvement. It's tricky to set up."
"I would like more training. As someone who is new to this world, I don't feel that the courses Omada provides are good enough. They should also improve the documentation. It is difficult to learn how to use the solution by yourself"
"Omada could communicate better with us about the product roadmap. We haven't gotten any updates about it. The user interface is often a bit difficult to understand. It isn't optimized for small screens, so it doesn't display all of the information clearly, so users need to scroll a lot."
"The solution should be made more agile for customers to own or configure."
"If I had to name one thing, it would be the user interface (UI)."
"Omada Identity has two main issues that need to be solved or improved the most. One is its setup or installation process because it's complex and cumbersome. I'm talking about the process for on-premises deployment because I've never tried the cloud version of Omada Identity. Setting up the cloud version should be much easier. The second area for improvement in Omada Identity is that it's piggybacking on Microsoft's complex way of having all kinds of add-ons, extensions, or setups, whether small or large, such as the new SQL Server, and it's cumbersome to make sure that everything works. Omada Identity is a complex solution and could still be improved."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"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."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"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."
"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."
"If you use the appliance version then it won't handle a huge database volume."
"RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle could improve out-of-the-box customization."
"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."
"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."
"The user interface and workflow need improvement, and more connectors would help."
"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."
More RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 17th in Identity Management (IM) with 7 reviews while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is ranked 23rd in Identity Management (IM) with 9 reviews. IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8, while RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is rated 6.8. 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 RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle writes "Lacking customization, poor support, but useful auditing". 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 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 IBM Security Verify Access vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle 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.
