Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Ping Identity Platform vs Red Hat Single Sign On comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (6th), Data Governance (8th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th), Access Management (4th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
Red Hat Single Sign On
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 7.7%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Single Sign On is 2.2%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

Dilip Reddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use but requires improvements in the area of stability
In my company, we have worked on authorization, and I know that there are different types of grants. We have worked on the authorization code, client credentials, and ROPC grant. There are two types of tokens, like the JWT token and internally managed reference tokens. JWT tokens are useful for finding information related to the claim requests. Internally managed reference tokens are useful for dealing with visual data and information. For the clients to fit the user information, they need to do additional work to fit all the user info into the site, which is to define and validate the token issue and provide the request for VPNs. I worked on the key differences between the authorization code and implicit grant. In the authorization code type, you will have the authorization code issued initially to the client, and the client has to exchange it with the authorization server, like using a DAC channel to get the access token. In implicit grants, tokens are issued right away if the application is a single-page application. We can either use the authorization code or an implicit grant.
Giovanni Baruzzi - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and flexible solution with some basic capabilities
I set up Red Hat Single Sign-On in half an hour. I had to install a single sign-on solution for a customer. I reviewed a list of all available products, which were no more than fifty, and analyzed them. I chose it because it was convincing, modern, and based on technology from 2015. I put my trust in this product, and after nine years, I feel confident in my decision. Deploying this solution usually takes half an hour. You need an operating system running, then deploy the packages and prepare the interfaces. I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"This is a user-friendly solution."
"I find the auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications."
"It gets a mobility portal in place in conjunction with Office 365. It provides very good possibilities and it's much better than other technology that we have used before which was unstable and slower."
"Setting up the infrastructure with Ping Identity Platform is very easy compared to other IAM products."
"It offers robust features and customization options that justify the cost."
"The soundness of the solution is its most valuable feature. For example, if you are in our corporate network, you can log on without any traffic interfering."
"It's pretty stable as a product."
"Red Hat SSO has a lot of very concise, well laid out documentation, which is available in the free edition as well."
"The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to assign only one password for the user at a false value."
"Good support for single sign-on protocols."
"Red Hat SSO integrates well with our other solutions. Using OIDC protocols and ITL integration, employees can authenticate with Red Hat SSO and access our microservices."
"The solution is flexible and has the same basic capabilities right out of the box. The most important feature of this product is that it is a Red double-sided product. One side is a well-known open-source project; the other is a Red Hat commercial product. The commercial product benefits from all the experience and contributions of the community, making it a very well-developed product."
"It is very easy to scale and use as you want."
 

Cons

"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"In Ping Identity, we have had some issues. We've worked with logging and troubleshooting, including some firewall and security issues."
"PingFederate's UI could be streamlined. They have recently made several improvements, but it's still too complex. It's a common complaint. The configuration should be simplified because the learning curve is too steep."
"The timing of the token validity, if it could be extended, would be great. I'm not sure if there is even an option to configure these types of settings."
"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."
"One significant challenge was ensuring smooth user migration during system upgrades in Ping."
"We had issues with the stability."
"PingAccess can only have one token provider, and you cannot enable two different token providers simultaneously."
"Red Hat publishes much more and communicates its actions and plans. They could provide words, maps, and other resources."
"Red Hat SSO's architecture could be updated."
"Security could be improved."
"They could provide more checks and balances to find out if there have been any security lapses, e.g., if somebody is trying to break into the system. Some other products have these detection mechanisms in case someone is trying to hack into the system or find out a user's passwords."
"The product’s technical support services could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingID pricing is a ten out of ten because it's a little bit cheaper than other tools, such as Okta and ForgeRock, and supports multiple tools."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"The product is costly."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"The license is around $8000 USD."
"Red Hat Single Sign On is expensive."
"It is a low cost product. This product can be used by non-profit organizations or universities, when they don't want to invest a lot of money."
"If you want support, that is when you use the paid version. There are different support categories that you can pay for, which provide different support levels. E.g., there is a quick response if you pay a higher amount, where the response time is within a few hours."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingID?
The mobile biometric authentication option improved user experience. It's always about security because, with two-factor authentication, it's always a separate device verifying the actual user logg...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingID?
The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap.
What needs improvement with PingID?
The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it.
What do you like most about Red Hat Single Sign On?
The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to assign only one password for the user at a false value.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Red Hat Single Sign On?
I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Single Sign On?
Red Hat publishes much more and communicates its actions and plans. They could provide words, maps, and other resources. Scalability could be improved, too. It could provide more documentation.
 

Also Known As

Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
Red Hat Single Sign-On, Red Hat SSO, RH SSO, RH-SSO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Ping Identity Platform vs. Red Hat Single Sign On and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.