We performed a comparison between IBM Security Verify Access and Symantec Identity Governance and Administration 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 for the validity of the resources is valuable. The tool allows resource assignments within a validity period so that the managers do not have to remember to revoke the access once the work is done."
"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."
"We are able to onboard new user accounts much faster by automating the process and standardizing our operations globally. Previously, there were many individual processes and manual admin interactions. We also see a lot of cost savings and benefits because through automation and standardization."
"The most valuable aspects of Omada Identity for me are the automation capabilities."
"The key benefit of Omada Identity is maintaining complete control."
"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."
"Omada's best feature is creating accounts, automatically assigning permissions, and distributing resources based on assignment policies."
"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."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 that it is easy to diagnose. It has a version of a virtual appliance so we can download it, run it, configure it, and it would take about 10 to 15 minutes to configure the cluster or so."
"The product is relatively easier to use than other identity management products."
"Self-registration and self-service password management are valuable features. The role modeling feature is also very useful. It allows you to model your enterprise role."
"I've used it to manage users, create and update, delete users, change passwords, and assign and change rules."
"The scalability potential is there if a company needs to expand."
"It is easy to use, and does not requires an extensive programming or development background."
"There are many valuable features within the solution. The product is easy to customize. It’s also highly secure."
"The solution is easy to scale."
"The architecture of the entire system should also be less complex. The way they process the data is complex."
"The Omada Identity SaaS version doesn't provide all the features Omada Identity on-premise provides."
"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."
"The current reporting tools in Omada are limited, but we expect significant improvements in the new version."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"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 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."
"Although the capabilities are there, the user interface needs to be redesigned and the opportunities for integration should be improved."
"It has a large footprint which you'd expect to be much, much smaller. Just to run basic services, we have 10 different servers. Also, if it were easier to manage, that'd be useful."
"Symantec is only on-premises, not on the cloud."
"In the next release, there should be provisioning of your certifications."
"There are several areas for improvement in Symantec Identity Governance and Administration. They have no proper documentation on how to do backups. They also have a lengthy workflow process where we have to make some configurations to manage automation in the rules and in our tasks which takes time. We have to manually configure all the configuration files, and we cannot export users because there's no export system in Symantec Identity Governance and Administration. What we'd like to see in the next release of the solution is for them to make configuration and integration with other systems their top priorities. We have many API systems to manage, so hopefully, if they make these enhancements shortly, we can directly connect with our API systems when using Symantec Identity Governance and Administration."
"I find the API boring. I also faced issues while integrating with CA SSO."
"The drawback with the CA Identity Manager is they don't have a connector to HR systems like SAP, or PeopleSoft, or Workday. That's a major drawback with the CA Identity Manager. For that we have to do lots of custom quoting to get data from HR systems. And if they could connect it to GRC systems, that's good to have in an identity product."
"The support from Symantec Identity Governance and Administration could improve."
More Symantec Identity Governance and Administration Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 17th in Identity Management (IM) with 7 reviews while Symantec Identity Governance and Administration is ranked 20th in Identity Management (IM) with 65 reviews. IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8, while Symantec Identity Governance and Administration is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Identity Governance and Administration writes "Works well on-premises and has partial capabilities but lacks many feaures". 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 Symantec Identity Governance and Administration is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, AlertEnterprise Enterprise Guardian, SAP Identity Management, Microsoft Identity Manager and Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine). See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. Symantec Identity Governance and Administration 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.
