Auth0 vs. Google Cloud Identity

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.

Incentivized

For example, if the system you are building is a general application service that does not primarily focus on ID management, it would be wise to use a service like Google's rather than developing your own IDaaS. While there may be cases where an IDaaS other than Google's is acceptable, Google is likely one of the best solutions when considering user recognition and ease of use. On the other hand, Gmail addresses are commonly used for other purposes, and users may not pay much attention to password management, so you should avoid using them for systems that require security. To strengthen security, you should consider making multi-factor authentication mandatory, etc.

Incentivized

• Overall we had very good experience with Auth0. It supports industry standard language or technology for integration. Very good performance.
• It's nice to work with Auth0's APIs and they are flexible.
• The management and configuration dashboard is useful and easy to deal with.

Incentivized

• Two-factor authentication available.
• The Google authentication method is familiar to many users.
• It is expected that it will also support authentication methods that will become common in the future.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• This time, I investigated it in advance, and it worked as expected, so I don't have any specific ideas for improvement.
• Additionally, if we were using another IDAAS, it would have been beneficial to have knowledge on how to integrate it with Google tools, along with some relevant case studies.

Incentivized

For our purposes, Auth0 is still one of the best valued RBAC platforms in the market.

Incentivized

Like in my case, it helps me build a better business by requiring authentication and better login features, as they are needed quickly. It helps me save time by not having to create it from scratch and provides better role-based login and access. One of my most helpful features is SSO (Single Sign On). If the user wants Microsoft-able SSO, Auth0 provides an all-in-one.

Incentivized

I chose Google because I thought it would be the best fit, but I didn't fully consider other cloud platforms (Azure, AWS, etc.), so I rated it 8. We assume that current Japanese users are familiar with Google, because we feel that there are far more people with Google email addresses than those with IDs on other cloud services.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

We adopted Google Cloud Identity as an additional feature because it allowed us to integrate with it using multi-factor authentication. The IBM Cloud platform remains valid, and we have no plans to discontinue its use for identity management. From the user's perspective, we simply added more authentication options. This also ensures we are prepared for future use when multi-factor authentication becomes available for user apps on the IBM Cloud.

Incentivized

• 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.)

Incentivized

• From a business perspective, there were two steps.
• First, we switched from our in-house ID management system to a cloud service. This allowed us to focus our development resources on application development.
• At the same time, we were able to localize the handling of personal information, which resulted in increased efficiency in management aspects, including handling external inquiries, and in the development of encryption.
• The second step was adding Google Cloud Identity as an option.
• This allows more users to easily use our services. It can be said that this has improved user convenience.
• I expect Google to accommodate future changes in authentication requirements, such as biometric authentication.

Incentivized