Hypersocket vs. IBM Cloud App ID

It has great flexibility with multiple domains, and the ability to sync or not sync passwords between primary and secondary accounts. I'd like to see a more granular set of permissions for the help desk role tied to an OU path rather than a whole directory. You can [create this] by defining multiple directories based on OUs but is less flexible this way.

Incentivized

Whenever you need to provide Security Provider functionality for a web based application it is well suited. You can also integrate with other directory services (e.g. SAML, Facebook, Google), but not so easily with other Auth0 based services. The customization of the login page is very intuitive, but does not allow much customisation. using the integrated Cloud Directory, you do not need to integrate with existing security providers and you can build up your own user base - including Multi-Factor Authentication settings and password policies.

Incentivized

• Self service password resets
• Ability to synchronize a primary account password with secondary accounts
• Flexibility and intuitivness

Incentivized

• Uses OIDC/OAuth, so the protocols for accessing user info and token management is familiar
• Clear pricing model
• API binds nicely with IBM Cloud Functions
• Billed as part of our IBM Cloud, along with our other services
• Front-end SDK for Vue, works well

Incentivized

• Help-Desk functionality similar to OneIdentity Self-Service Password Manager, as it provides additional users that do not require administrative access to assist with managing end-users who may have locked themselves out of HyperSocket Access Manager by forgetting their own security questions.
• Too many features which become unusable and feel like the payment plans are not flexible since it's an all-in-one product with one price. It is not necessarily a bad thing as most subscription-based pricing forces a buyer to pay more for an integral service that is only available on the highest price-plan. You really do get what you pay for, but we found many of our use-case scenarios limited the product.
• This isn't necessarily against the product, just a personal opinion around Multi-Factor authentication which is always primarily driven mobile devices. Not all companies or end-users have access to a multi-factor device, (or in our case, are allowed to have access to a cell phone while servicing members/clients). This creates a shortfall to allow multi-factor functionality to extend to all users unless there are hardware tokens, which can be miss placed or left out more easily as most users don't treat it the same way they would their personal smartphone.

Incentivized

• Pricing can be heavy on small organizations.
• User interface updates could be timely.
• Cloud services hangs at times, but very rarely.

Incentivized

One Identity is a great self-service password management system, however, it is limited to just that. As it stacks against the competition, Hypersocket isn't modular, it's an all-in-one which most other systems aren't. One Identity is what we use today for self-service, and migrated to KeePass for users centralized password manager. This probably wasn't the best move but this was all driven by cost and budgetary constraints.

Incentivized

Both the software have different use cases, like IBM Cloud App ID, which will be more suitable for internal websites and apps or specific event website authentications, Auth0 can be suitable for consumer websites, e-commerce sites, where social media login is preferred more by the users. Both have their own capabilities so can be chosen according to their needs.

Incentivized

• As with any IT Service or Solution, the investment will always be seen as a sunk cost. The only ROI would be the time and resources spent elsewhere rather than with Password Management through an IT Department or similar department. I found that the time spent on password management was about the same, as many users who are frequently forgetting a password are also forgetting their security question & answers.
• There are some positives, as it was able to help manage the bulk of their non-windows passwords or passwords related to another online service. The centralized password manager doesn't feel like a true single sign-on but for most users, it replaces a hand-written copy they have taped to a monitor.
• It can help with automating some of the active directory workflows with its own user provisioning functionality. Took more time to set up than it was to manage on its own.

Incentivized

• This has had a positive impact on security while developing our company's first major application.
• It has impacted our development process heavily by making authentication simpler than ever.
• It has helped reduce time in our development process by having easy integration and useful guides.

Incentivized