Auth0 is an identity management platform for developers and application teams. It gives users a platform to authenticate and authorize, providing secure access to applications, devices, and users. Auth0 aims to provide the simplicity, extensibility, and expertise to scale and protect any application, for any audience. Integrate Auth0 into any app, written in any language, and any framework.
$23
per month
CyberArk Workforce Identity
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
CyberArk Identity is a SaaS-delivered suite of solutions designed to simplify identity and access management in enterprises. CyberArk Identity unifies Workforce Access and Identity Management solutions in a single offering. Workforce Access capabilities include single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, session security, and credential management. Identity Management capabilities include lifecycle management, identity orchestration, and identity governance. With CyberArk Identity,…
It was long ago , cognito was in its early days and had critical bug about email case sensitive. Okta Developer lack the separation in model we wanted ,meaning modeling our tenants to their model . we didn't want to create an App per tenant , and wanted some shared …
Firebase: Pricing is too high and the efficiency and store option is not an ROI point. Okta: Too high pricing. Lack of secure code not good for mobile application auth.
Great product and large user base, easier to integrate. We used Auth0 to take care of single sign-on from all of our clients' auth domains. After initial development to integrate Auth0 with our systems, our client onboard has been very much simplified. The SSO integration …
Auth0 is one of the best login solutions for any website or application. The pricing is more considerable than other similar software. It is easy to use and does not require much effort in deploying. However, the deployment process is not so simple for drag and drop websites or …
Auth0's documentation, framework support, large community, and overall developer experience make the cost trade-off worthwhile. Auth0's developer experience makes it significantly easier for our firm to quickly develop apps that require user accounts, even if we use an SPA or a …
Auth0 is non-evasive and does not require software download. It is user friendly, seamless, and doesn't require additional actions on the part of the user. IBM Trusteer is none of these things and is based on a technology stack that cannot scale in the same way as Auth0. We …
Auth0 allows many other functionalities than the other products, such as customization of auth flows, emails, security options, etc. The Authentication & Management APIs also allow us to easily create and modify users, roles and permissions, by automating or integrating Auth0 …
We went with Auth0 over Okta due to price concerns and the overall simplicity of Auth0. We chose Auth0 over Amazon Cognito because Cognito has very poor documentation and client library support. Auth0 offers a service that hits the sweet spot for organizations with small …
Auth0 was chosen over Keycloak mainly because of poor documentation and various challenges that came with working with an open-source application. Auth0 was polished and provided SDKs and reliable Enterprise support.
Compare to AWS cognito, Auth0 is easy to setup. The API is nice to work with and flexible. And the backend administration dashboard is very robust and easy to use. Also, the pricing is reasonable based on the subscription version and online usage. The services are well …
Auth0 was just a lighter lift to get going. As mentioned previously, their documentation was robust, easy to read, and had exactly my use-case among many others. I recently read that Okta is acquiring Auth0 - this would have been a no-brainer for me if I was Okta. Congrats to …
Auth0 came highly recommended by a friend and former colleague. I trust his judgement tremendously. Thus we started looking at and experimenting with Auth0 first. As this was immediately successful (we had the first bit up-and-running in a single day) we did not really look …
We looked at Okta before they bought Auth0. Okta is more sophisticated in terms of enterprise solutions, but was out-of-date when it came to user and developer solutions.
I was not involved in the decision to use Auth0. However, I work with many clients who use Okta and Azure as their IdPs. Auth0's documentation is by far the best, but Okta's interface is easier to navigate.
We use Google as our IdP because we use Google for our inboxes, so it …
We've previously had our own in-house solution or used an external, specific OAuth provider. Both of these were fine on the surface, but they required a lot of overhead and maintenance work that we didn't want to deal with, as this is not our code business.
Auth0 is better positioned for online services such as ours. It has transparent and affordable pricing, exceptional developer experience, and a fantastic administration console. We did not evaluate the other systems, and may still end up one day, but for now, we're very happy …
Auth0 is extremely easy to use; it is also quite affordable. After reading some blogs, documentation, and reviews, it seems to me that the authentication, authorization, and security that it offers is also superior to Microsoft Azure Active Directory and The Okta Identity …
I chose Auth0 over Amazon Cognito for the simple reason that the Auth0 documentation is 1000 times better! I honestly could never figure out how to actually do anything useful with Cognito, but perhaps their docs have gotten better, I don't know. Auth0 had me up and running …
Centrify offered us more for our money by being more than just an SSO platform. There were several other features included such as MDM and MFA. This started other initiatives for us and felt the other solutions we evaluated would not have been able to provide.
We reviewed Okta and OneLogin while looking at Centrify for our ticketing solution SSO partner. When doing so we looked at it from the aspect of if we wanted to roll this out where we could see the use cases for it and initially it would be in a couple departments then branch …
Centrify was introduced to provide a secure, versatile and easy-to-use login experience, but it is still competiting against the other products that are in use within our company.
Seemed to be the best in breed and the one with deeper Mac integration on the short roadmap. As an Apple Distinguished School, this is obviously very critical to us. Very easy to set up and it has a deep pre-canned application pool for already deployed apps. Very easy for …
During our evaluation process, Centrify could show in the PoC that they are very flexible and open minded to our ideas. An application integration which was not part of the product catalog has been integrated for free. Furthermore the whole package compared to the …
Centrify's pricing was much better than their competitors. They also offered a better sign-in/multi-factor experience for our users when doing pilot testing. Their product also included other features like Mobile Device Management that was a nice add-on.
We started off using ADFS from Microsoft, which took most of a day to get fully functional and nearly a week to get fully optimized. The documentation was inconsistent with ADFS and there was no real support without opening a Microsoft Premier Support ticket. At the time, if …
We felt that Centrify had the most flexibility for the cost. They also have fairly robust mobile device management capabilities which some of the other products did not have.
We selected Centrify over some of the other services out their because it gives us more options such as SSO and MDM all in one and for the most part it is easy to use not only for the administrator but also for the end user.
OneLogin and Okta provide similar experiences, but OneLogin is less mature than Centrify. Their Mac and Windows management suites are still in a beta phase are cannot be deployed en masse to our user base. Okta is more expensive and does not have the security compliance. …
I was previously a OneLogin customer and even though Centrify has a lot more features, I'd have to say that my experience with OneLogin versus Centrify has been a lot better overall.
Auth0 is very well suited for situations where a JSON web token can be used for authorizing APIs, websites, and mobile devices. It's especially useful if the JWT validation can happen at a gateway layer. It's especially useful if you only need to verify the user's email address or mobile number as the passwordless login is easy to implement.
Centrify Identity Service is well suited for nearly any organization, especially ones utilizing Active Directory for user management. It is especially well suited for organizations looking to reduce internal resource use, because it's easy to maintain and manage. Its features also allow you to free up resources previously dedicated to the provisioning and deprovisioning of Office 365/Salesforce users (as well as other applications).
Single Sign-on Integration is easy and complete configuration is UI driven with lots of help tips
RESTFul APIs for Multi-factor Authentication is easy to use and implement. Also, Centrify supports all new Security features for Multi Factor Authentication and hence you can easily select and configure different challenges based on the policies and roles for the user.
Lots of Built-in reports available for normal day to day auditing.
Auth0 can be somewhat limiting if you want a lot of control over the design of your authentication flow. Custom branding can be done, but it may be limited depending on how you plan to integrate.
The Auth0 API documentation has proven confusing at times; a single API endpoint's behaviour will change based on inputs and configured settings (e.g. offline_access). Consequently fields that are advertised as being returned in a response might not be there or have different values if you miss a key detail and it can be difficult to debug when this happens. All information required is available in the documentation but requires some digging.
The toggle to switch tenants feels a bit odd, it works, but I've had a few instances where I didn't realize I was on a staging tenant looking for something that was on the production tenant. Not a big deal, just something to watch out for.
Occasionally, I get logged out of Gmail, sometimes in the middle of an email. I'm not sure why it happens, but I think it has something to do with timing out. Which is strange because I'm on email all day. Not sure why.
Centrify is central to creating efficiency and safety for our clients and internally. To remove it would cause a massive disturbance in the lives of our employees and our clients.
- integration and ease of implementation - great over all product support specially for passkey biometric authentication -Auth0 is very reliable to use their API integration for security verification. It provides best API to integrate our website and application with Single Sign In option and two step verification option. Sales and technical teams are always there to provide support
There isn't a clear method to get a hold of support when trouble arises if you're on their standard plan. You can file a support ticket and they generally are responsive. I've often been able to find similar questions to the questions I've had when it comes to support in their ticket history, however, some have been closed without a satisfactory conclusion for the original poster.
The support staff thus far has been very helpful. At times I feel they are driving the process forward without my intervention or constant reminder, which is nice to have in a company for a change. Most support seems to be a hassle but so far Centrify appears to treat your project as their own project.
Auth0 is non-evasive and does not require software download. It is user friendly, seamless, and doesn't require additional actions on the part of the user. IBM Trusteer is none of these things and is based on a technology stack that cannot scale in the same way as Auth0. We believe Auth0 provides a superior solution and is well suited for our own technology stack.
We started off using ADFS from Microsoft, which took most of a day to get fully functional and nearly a week to get fully optimized. The documentation was inconsistent with ADFS and there was no real support without opening a Microsoft Premier Support ticket. At the time, if you turned on Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) for Office 365, it turned it on for everything without any granularity. Our Information Security department said that MFA was a requirement for offsite access to our email systems, but users didn't need MFA when onsite. We looked at Okta, OneLogin, and Centrify at the same time. Centrify was the only one that responded quickly and offered a free POC with support included. We tried to deploy the Okta solution on our own, but ran into issues due to some of our non-standard AD configuration. We never received a return call from OneLogin. The Centrify POC took about 15 minutes to complete for basic functionality and a couple of hours to work out the issues related to our environment. We have been very happy with the Centrify solution and went live with our POC.
Development time has been allocated to the more core parts of our business.
We are confident in the security of our user's accounts and their data.
Auth0's login flows are customizable which means that we don't have to worry about users being confused when logging in/changing their passwords, and we didn't event have to spend that much time configuring this. (Full in-house development for login could take weeks to get right.)
CyberArk Workforce Identity provides secure access to on-premises and cloud applications. The platform is highly scalable and works well for companies of any size.
I can classify and label data. Also keep track of activity in shared applications and data, to know exactly who accesses each of the files.