What needs improvement with Okta Customer Identity?

I don't have specific suggestions, but for sure, Okta Platform could improve with maybe some language tools. The translation in different languages could help employees around different countries, and these important aspects could be improved for sure. This is the only suggestion that I have. Another improvement maybe is not regarding the platform itself but more about the services. Okta Platform, especially in Europe where we are based, could improve the level of service. In some situations, I think it's not at the same level of the quality of the platform. To receive a perfect score, Okta Platform should improve some support service level and maybe add some languages to the translation. These are some points where they can improve.

To improve Okta Platform, I suggest simplifying web manuals to be more understandable for non-technical users, making it easier for them to navigate both the API and user interface levels. A common issue with many software products is the need for better error messages; having clear descriptions can greatly assist IT, developers, and testers in debugging when users misuse the application.

I cannot think of any such feature right now. Most of the features were pretty basic. In my limited experience, things have been great. I cannot really think of anything that can be enhanced. If they can focus on keeping it up all the time and focus on reducing the vulnerabilities that may exist, that would be great, but nothing that I can think of right now.

I would like to see Okta Platform become simpler for users, as I think that is the most important thing. I am an experienced engineer with 35 years of experience, but it could become simpler for new engineers who are just starting and building applications using LLMs. An IM supervisor integration with Cloud Code could improve integration with agent functions. I cannot think of any improvements needed for Okta Platform at the moment; I think what it has is very great.

A couple of things need to be improved at Okta Platform level. In AWS, we are using tag-based policies to enforce the RABC, but when trying to configure tags in Okta Platform level, we are not able to configure them. At Okta Platform level, we have not yet configured the machine-to-machine configuration. It is very difficult for me to create the API accounts to enforce. For example, when we generate temporary credentials in AWS, it is challenging to use Okta Platform level because there are no features to create CLI-based temporary credentials. I would like to improve the tagging on Okta Platform. For every identity, we need to create a tag. Instead of hard coding in AWS, we use tag-based authentication, allowing access based on tags associated with resources. From my perspective, everything is good on Okta Platform except for the tags that need to be improved.

Okta Platform could be improved or enhanced by adding more integration options for third-party applications.

The major problem we face with Okta Platform is pricing because most of our clientele move away from Okta Platform because of the pricing. If someone is looking for on-premises solutions, they usually don't choose Okta Platform. They predominantly try to go for Ping rather than Okta Platform because Ping provides a very wide variety of concepts and tools and details their tool on a very specific level, particularly their on-premises tools. Anyone who invests has to pay a higher price, and if with the same kind of structure they can get some other enterprise-grade tool that caters to all those things, they will definitely choose Ping rather than Okta Platform.

The one thing which can be improved in Okta Platform would be the certifications which they provide. It is crucial for people to get recognized in the industry. Also, some of their documents have outdated images or screenshots, leading to confusion. Keeping the knowledge base updated quarterly is advisable. In my environment, I have not specifically used some concepts like device management and Okta Platform's OAuth in the CISM platform. I would like to have further implementation progress on them.

The only improvement point I would suggest for Okta Platform is that it needs to redesign the feature request system because there are many important features that are not taken into consideration. I do not want to go into specific details, but you can visit Okta Ideas and see many ideas that have been shared. Many of them are prioritized, but the fact that a user wants it or that a metric exists does not help. Okta Platform needs to redesign or repurpose the entire concept of how it wants to handle feature requests.

To improve Okta Platform, I think they should enhance the 2LO service-to-service aspect by integrating more features on the MCP side, allowing for authentication of containers running on the gateway. Instead of just client ID and secret, they could add a Vault-like storage for keys in integrated AWS services to smoothen the process. The deployment experience with Okta Platform is generally smooth. They provide Okta Preview for non-production deployments, and I suggest they implement a green and blue rollback mechanism in production to avoid any delays for application teams during real deployments.

Okta Platform does not recognize when I have already verified myself once on my HubSpot login across multiple tabs. I have to verify myself for every single tab. If there were a way to recognize that I already verified myself on that URL or domain and just give me access to the rest of the tabs instead of having to click one by one, that would be an improvement.

Although I am a fan of Okta Platform overall, there are areas where it could improve security outcomes and reduce admin friction. My top improvement areas include the system log and analytics upgrade, which are great for point troubleshooting, but trending and root cause analysis across large tenants still require exporting to SIEM. Verbose queries and long-range retention costs can add up. Additionally, while certificate rotations are better than most, the process is still manual for busy portfolios, especially concerning multi-SP SAML certificate rotations and app metadata drift. Two more buckets of potential improvements for Okta Platform involve user experience and security. There is the issue of push fatigue and prompt sprawl, where users receive multiple prompts across different apps and sessions. I arrived at the rating of eight because the core controls are strong and reliable, but a few operational UX and UI gaps prevent it from being rated higher. The reasons for not giving it a nine or ten include ongoing issues concerning safety and change safety, the complexity of group rules and mappings, and the lack of robustness in policy management. Additionally, there remains a need for more manual involvement than necessary, especially for large portfolios and dual certificate rotation, along with proactive SP data metadata validation.

In Okta Platform, I do not see much room for improvement because currently, they are managing automations and the new workflow, which helps with automation. Previously, this was not available in Okta Platform, but it was introduced recently. The automation aspect can be improved.

I have not encountered any negative points for this product. For log monitoring, after a certain period of time, logs are deleted, such as after three months, and you have to configure it using a separate or external SIEM connector, such as Splunk or Cortex XSOAR, because after 90 days, the logs will be deleted, so we have to take an export manually or add one external log monitoring solution. If the organization is big, I can say Okta Platform is affordable; however, for small-scale industries, I would not recommend it, but for medium and enterprise organizations, it is good.

Some areas for improvement with Okta Platform, especially concerning AI and the federal aspect, are acknowledged as areas that Okta Platform needs to work on to offer features comparable to those provided by Duo.

Okta Platform could be improved by offering more out-of-the-box templates for advanced workflows and making the administration console faster when searching through a very large group of users.

The user interface could be enhanced to allow direct number selection for multi-factor authentication instead of typing out information.

Stability and the UI/UX of Okta Customer Identity are fine as they are; I do not see any need for improvement in those areas. From the user perspective, everything is good and no change is needed. I do not think any biometrical features for authentication or limitations from Okta Customer Identity on request systems can be added at this moment. Some users face challenges after upgrades. Whenever we upgrade Okta Customer Identity, there is no challenge or blocker from Okta Customer Identity. However, I have seen cases where there might be issues with InTune or JumpCloud due to sync delays from their end; Okta Customer Identity was fine at that moment. After Okta Customer Identity made an upgrade process, we had some challenges with the integration of Okta Customer Identity and Jamf. The only issue with Okta Customer Identity is after the upgrade process; we have some issues with the integration between Okta Customer Identity and Jamf. The only point for improvement is the upgrade process.

In Okta Identity Governance ( /categories/identity-management-im ) and Okta Privileged Access, some features are still being developed. Integration with Active Directory servers, Cisco routers, and switches is not currently available. Additionally, integration with platforms like DB2 ( /products/ibm-db2-database-reviews ) and Oracle or SaaS-based databases is still in progress. These features need further development for full functionality.

Okta Customer Identity is continuously improving its solution. Since we started using it in 2019, we have observed numerous enhancements to increase security.

There is room for Okta Customer Identity to improve by increasing the reliability for the server end, creating more directories, and focusing on internal users rather than external or contract-based ones. Additionally, extending idle session times from ten milliseconds to at least forty-five seconds would be beneficial. It is also suggested that patches be applied annually rather than quarterly.

Okta has a limitation with directory integrations. If you have multiple Active Directory integrations, the user distinguished name (DN) and the manager DN don't get imported properly into the Okta user profile. It has a property of Get AD user's property, but that has limitations when writing an expression language to import changes or updates to user DNs or manager DNs from AD, especially if you have AD master users. Also, Okta doesn't have a partial push. It pushes down the full profile schema for lifecycle management or provisioning. Even if only one attribute gets updated, even though it is unmapped, it can override other values in the downstream application by nullifying the query. That's the biggest flaw in my experience. The product releases a lot of brand-new features within the quarterly releases. There's a feature roadmap for Okta CIM, and most of it is coming in with a lot of users or the customer side.

The product must be provided for free. We cannot substantiate the cost with the features provided by the tool. Microsoft provides similar features for free. I don’t see any extra features in Okta.

We faced a bit of an issue integrating the product with some applications. The integration process takes a bit longer than we would want it to.

There are areas for improvement. One thing that seems odd to me is the lack of a built-in way to export all user data. They have a solution available on GitHub that they basically endorse, and it's developed internally, but for some reason, it's not integrated into their product. So, that's a peculiar aspect. Instead, the support says they don't offer it but provide an alternative solution that we have to manage separately. So, it's a situation where they don't want to include it in their product, but they offer assistance outside of it? It's unclear what kind of support you would need for it. It just works. Another area of improvement is scalability.

What I'd like to see improved in Okta Customer Identity is the process of exporting users. Currently, it lacks this feature, and you have to use a third-party tool to export users from the group. Exporting users should be very easy, though I did notice that Okta Customer Identity is being upgraded from time to time, and I've been seeing much improvement in it compared to the previous years.

There is an access request system that is very limited access to the systems available for end-users. The access request should improve in Okta Customer Identity.

The solution works well. I can't speak to any areas of improvement. In the future, we'd like to see the product implement more security features, like, for example, zero-trust.

The initial setup could be easier to do.

All of the governance functionality and privileged account management could be improved.

I would like to see the provisioning simplified. When it comes to certain tasks, such as where it is activated on-premises, Azure AD is simpler than Okta. SSO functionality needs better client support.

This solution would be improved by adding more biometrics features. One example is Cyberside Biometrics. The technical support is good but needs to improve in their response time. In the next release, I would like to see biometrics, multi-factor authentication, and to rely more on the mobile or something different on CyberSide.

The Identity Management part can be improved a bit.