We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID and RSA Authentication Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Authentication Systems solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of this solution are security, the conditional access feature, and multifactor authentication."
"The scalability is good now, and I find it to be more stable and faster since scaling up to ESX."
"It is one of those costs where you can't really quantify a return on investment. In the grand scheme of things, if we didn't have it, we would probably have a lot more breaches. It would be a lot harder to detect issues because we would have people using static usernames and passwords for various sites, making us open to a lot more attacks. The amount of security and benefit that we get out of it is not quantifiable but the return of investment from a qualitative point of view is much higher than not having it."
"It enhanced our end user experience quite a bit. Instead of the days of having to contact the service desk with challenges for choosing their password, users can go in and do it themselves locally, regardless of where they are in the world. This has certainly made it a better experience accessing their applications. Previously, a lot of times, they had to remember multiple usernames and passwords for different systems. This solution brings it all together, using a single sign-on experience."
"Just because I've been in the Azure space since it started out and in the Microsoft Cloud AD since the BPOS days in the early 2000s, and it's just a product that made life simpler for my clients to be able to integrate everything."
"The security features are great. They will report in advance to you in the case of suspicious activity."
"User and device management is the most valuable feature."
"The interface is well laid out and it is easy to navigate."
"The most valuable feature is the provision part. The mapping and the logging is also very good. In addition, the troubleshooting, from a console point of view, is easy for administration and on the provisioning and logging part."
"It stands out as a comprehensive and adaptable solution that excels in both on-premises and cloud-based authentication, offers strong security with multi-layered authentication, and boasts a well-maintained product with reliable performance."
"I have found RSA Authentication Manager to be scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the SecurID."
"It is a good solution for token identification."
"It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten."
"Easy setup, deployment, and integration in different infrastructures, including virtual ones."
"Certain aspects of the user interface can be rather clunky and slow. It can sometimes be circular in terms of clicking a link for a risky user sign-in and seeing what the risky login attempts were. It takes you in a circle back to where you started, so drilling down into details, especially if you are not in it every day and it is one of many tools that you use, can be difficult. It can be difficult to track down the source of an issue."
"To look at more documentation, engineering, or an open standard would be nice."
"Microsoft Entra ID's impact on access and identity management is relatively limited."
"The scalability of the solution is good."
"I want to see new functionalities for the active directory."
"There are issues using it with ADFS."
"Microsoft Authenticator can improve their notifications because sometimes, my team doesn't receive notifications about app updates and authentication failures."
"When it comes to identity governance, the governance features in Azure AD are very focused on Microsoft products. I would like to see those governance and life cycle management features offered for non-Microsoft products connected to Azure AD."
"We have encountered issue when trying to expand this particular solution for a large set of users across the country."
"There is room for improvement in the RSA support."
"Enhancing the user interface and expanding their marketing efforts in regions like Nigeria and West Africa could be beneficial."
"We are not planning on using the solution in the future."
"Perhaps parts of the the user interface should become more intuitive."
"Our major problem is the authentication via Microsoft, via Microsoft cloud systems. This is our major aim, to be a valued product for the future. The biggest problem is to work against cheap cloud systems. Cloud identification is our main problem at this time."
"We found technical support was not very responsive to our requests for assistance."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Authentication Systems with 190 reviews while RSA Authentication Manager is ranked 14th in Authentication Systems with 10 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while RSA Authentication Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Authentication Manager writes "A highly effective and versatile solution that excels in terms of security, integration, scalability, and customer support". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Yubico YubiKey and Cisco Duo, whereas RSA Authentication Manager is most compared with Cisco Duo, RSA SecurID, RSA Adaptive Authentication, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Thales Authenticators. See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. RSA Authentication Manager report.
See our list of best Authentication Systems vendors.
We monitor all Authentication Systems 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.
