Forefront Identity Manager (Discontinued) vs. SecurID

I think that MIM is great for compliance since it reduces the number of logins that are required by users. Most offices have post-it notes with logins floating around because there are so many to remember or there are "shared" logins. This reduces the number of logins to 1 and you can easily revoke access in one fell swoop. This prevents gaps and holes with terminations and updates to select groups are super simple.

Easy to implement and support. Flexible platforms and user-friendly interface. Not a lot of customization is available to customers and response time of support could be better. There are now competing products that utilize new features like facial recognition. Using camera and fingerprint sensors are becoming standard in smartphones so RSA SecureID should offer those as options.

• Authentication
• Security
• Identity Management

• RSA Authentication Manager is easy to deploy and configure.
• It is a scalable solution meant for a large enterprise.
• Some of the key features of RSA Authentication Manager where it particularly does well are provisioning, mapping, and logging.
• It has a very nice console with good administrative and troubleshooting options.
• Reliable security for VPN, applications, and wifi.

• For Windows Server 2008 R2 Servers is a great tool to set a codeless provisioning over new objects.
• Can easily integrate with Active Directory and Exchange Servers, improving the identity sync between the final user and the lifecycle management.
• Improvements in the areas of performance, simplified deployment easing the troubleshooting tasks, better documentation knowledge base, and more language support.
• The codeless provisioning provided in FIM can sustain a variety from high demand to mid-size scenarios for account lifecycle management.

• Slow to provide updates to latest operating system versions.
• While the GUI is clean and easy to use, it does look very dated.
• There is not an option for a temporary code to log in. It would be nice for situations where you are at a remote site but don't have your device (laptop, phone, etc.) with you, as well as other situations.

Long story short, does the job. Can use company credentials to setup and access the account for SecurID. Easy to setup and implement. Doesn't have a high learning curve.

Using it very frequently, it's important that its straight forward and I do not have to go through unnecessary hoops to achieve something seemingly simple. Can setup using the company credentials and do not have to setup up a separate account. Setup was fast and easy. GUI is very straight forward and quick.

Their support for onboarding and set-up is quite good. The only issues we tend to have are obtaining new user devices. These need to be planned ahead of time.

It is Microsoft. We are a Microsoft shop, primarily. It integrates deeply with Active Directory making it good for Microsoft Active Directory shops.

Overall MS AAD is good but we have had a few too many reliability issues with the product that have lead to enterprise authentication outages over the last year. The Senior executives have a preference on Securid to be more reliable than MS AAD. SecurID does a better job in Integration for legacy on-premise applications for instance.

• We see a positive impact simply in the time savings alone. Chasing accounts around is time-consuming and prone to error.
• The cost to us is negligible to the value it provides.

• Implementing RSA SecurID has allowed us to help our clients understand we are committed to compliance.
• Implementing RSA SedcurID has, however, negatively impacted employee productivity. Employees need to be aware of the additional steps they need to take to authenticate to a protected system.
• RSA SecurID has helped us with our compliance audits.