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
Microsoft Entra ID
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Microsoft Azure Active Directory or Azure AD) is a cloud-based identity and access management (IAM) solution supporting restricted access to applications with Azure Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) built-in, single sign-on (SSO), B2B collaboration controls, self-service password, and integration with Microsoft productivity and cloud storage (Office 365, OneDrive, etc) as well as 3rd party services.
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 …
Google Workspace is really pretty much the only other primary competitor. And again, Microsoft has just been the standard for so many years and it was in place at the organization when I was first brought on at the beginning of my tenure. And so it didn't seem logical to switch …
Yeah, so basically that product to be honest, was more of a getting comfortable with cloud identification management. So that was a product I used. It has all the policies for desktops and doing updates and all that central directory identity provisioning stuff for users. Users …
We use DUO as another IDP solution and we also evaluated Okta as a solution. We didn't have a choice to be honest, because Microsoft products, you can't get away with it, but it's built in and a bunch of other providers have it as authentication, so it's great.
We've used other Microsoft products and we've also used some standalone products, like each application you can have its own identity, so we've looked at some of those too, but we try to use the Entra ID as much as possible because it offers a wider range of reliability.
We actually did just the Microsoft Active directory, so we picked the actual. We did just pure active directory. I mean the open LDAP stuff, but it didn't quite work that well.
I think the closest one would be because we recently went through an implementation, but Salesforce has their own version of a signal sign-on product. It's not the same. I'd say that it works, but it doesn't give you as much functionality.
For us, it was a natural evolution of our use of active directory. As we went from on-premises to the cloud, this was an easy extension of our authentication infrastructure. We looked at other products from Oracle, so Oracle ID, Oracle Identity Management. We looked at pink …
We used Google before, but we tried to use it but it didn't. We didn't like it. I'll this is better. It integrates better with our environment that we have right now.
We're Microsoft dedicated. We do however, displace other products that do similar things, so a lot of third party products, so even like Okta. In my opinion, it's just equally as powerful or more powerful of a product and it has a way better price point for customers. I think …
I'd love to tell you about Amazon IM and Google's IM because they suck and they tell you to use Entra ID, factually. They're like, oh cool, set it up with Entra ID. They just know you're going to do it. I don't think you guys have a competitor, to be honest. You just don't.
We're a Microsoft Native shop, so we're looking at Okta's identity tool, SailPoint and a few other competitors of Venture id. And we decided to go with this one because we're already using Active Directory, so just using the native Microsoft Suites kind of just they integrate …
Well, it's natively integrated with all Microsoft Stack, so it comes very handy when you need to, for example, use it for Intune Association, et cetera, so it's very handy.
Previously we had worked with Okta, which was kind of using our replacement for active directory server, and I know that has integrations, but we ended up just going with Entra ID just for the ease of access and without having to stack on an additional third party application …
In our application use case, it's kind of unique and there isn't any like for if there's anything on the identity space, probably Okta. Yeah. But we do both use them and we have integration with Okta and Entra ID, so it works for us very well.
Microsoft Login ID was chosen for its ease of use and availability of access via any device. Unlike the old Active Directory, it has a low learning curve and is very intuitive for analysts who are using it for the first time.
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.
For one, a significant factor for us is that it is integrated with HelloID, which gives us, as the IT department, a lot of time back because we don’t need to create user accounts manually. It is great for the roles we have defined, as they can be used repeatedly. A great feature is that guest accounts can be created for external users; we only need to be in a closed area of your domain.
It addresses the issue of identity management very well with respect to putting in that multi authentication.
It can also support with respect to we can push these policies into another product that is not Microsoft, but it needs that SSO so we can have one account going into multi different accounts. I think that's the biggest pros and the easy use of Microsoft 365 also is one of those pros also in terms of administration.
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.
Well, I'm an active ad admin, so there's a lot of features in active directory that Entra ID seems to be just adding now. We're kind of figuring out that the policies are different than Entra ID that they were in active directory and we're finding other products to do that, like Azure policy. Some things I'm used to seeing in identity products or like active directory aren't in Entra iID, but are doing good job of managing stuff that it does so far.
Entra ID is a vital part of our Identity management/administration. With the integrations it has to other Microsoft products, setup and configuration is a breeze. Additionally, Microsoft has been around a long time and have the resources to ensure this product is stable and secure for many years to come. We know it will evolve with time to provide us what we need as technology changes.
- 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
Very easily usable. It could be easier to use. Implementation was kind of tricky. We do run a hybrid environment, so we're syncing a local active directory instance with Entra ID, so that could be a little tricky. But outside of that, if you're not running a hybrid deployment or a version of Entra ID usually, it's pretty straightforward.
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.
Microsoft has offered Azure Active Directory as a solution for a couple of decades now, so they have seen and anticipated almost any issue that an organization may face and can therefore help. The cloud offering of Azure Active Directory offers some additional "self healing" or monitoring services that can minimize the need for a service call. However, as with most large companies supporting a fast growing market, there may be some gaps in service knowledge (and particularly processing) from the front line / tier one staff as they follow a corporate script at first contact.
Make sure you use a good partner. Our implementation was a bit longer and more problematic than we expected. Our partner got it done, but, in my opinion, some of their inexperience and staffing issues were evident.
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.
Microsoft Entra ID is not as stand-alone product as competitors like Okta. It may lack some of the features that competing products have but on the other hand it integrates both technically and license wise with other Microsoft cloud services and is easy to deploy. It is also the easiest way to extend identity management to the cloud if you already have Microsoft Active Directory in use.
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.)
I don't know if I can really quantify that. It's one of those products that just exists and so there's not a whole lot of changes that we need to make with the product. And so I guess in terms of value, what we get is we don't have to worry about the identity management piece. We know that that's taken care of.
