Microsoft Entra External ID vs. PingOne from Ping Identity

It is not easy to calculate the actual ROI due to the difficult quantification of all factors, but it certainly contributed a lot in protecting, monitoring and controlling access to our system. It also made it much easier to detect vulnerable external users with simple and "easy to hack" passwords they use on multiple apps.

Really like [this] solution, it fits our requirements 100%. There are unlimited possibilities to extend the product, either by creating additional adapters or selectors. We really like the policy management level in PingFederate. It's extremely helpful when we can specify customer journey per many different requirements like user location, application type etc. As well, both StepUp and TopDown authentication flows were implemented [easily].

• Single sign-on simplifies access to your apps from anywhere
• Strong authentication for your customers using their preferred identity provider.
• Integrating with social accounts such as Facebook or Google+

Incentivized

• Based on open standards, we can use as much or as little of the Ping suite as we like, depending on which other technologies we've already implemented.
• Continuous innovation and product enhancements have ensured their products continue to meet our rapidly evolving needs.
• Ping Identity has been an outstanding partner, starting with the RFP process and continuing to this day, years after the sale. They are focused on our success at every level of the company and are highly responsive to our needs, issues, and product suggestions.

• Troubleshooting diagnostic logs effectively requires VS Code
• Group and role management requires additional effort
• The programming model (XML) could use some developer experience love

Incentivized

• solution has some propriety solution which is hard to customize
• doesn't support all workflow and hooks
• solution has aged and not all configuration are supported

Incentivized

Easy to use; all UI's are user friendly and easy to learn.[The] possibility to use API is [a] big value as well. We really like integration with CyberArk; with it we can manage privileged accounts according to company standards without breaking any rules, and we can be 100% sure that only approved persons will have administrative access.

Ping's support is willing and attentive, but if I am in a position to engage them I am often at a point where most of the usual support engineers would not be in a position to answer the questions I have. However, Ping has been more than willing to engage their product and development teams with our organization as we take advanced deployment and use case challenges to them.

Incentivized

Each one of these alternatives has pros and cons. PingOne from Ping Identity states they "help deliver the secure and seamless customer experience to win battles for customer acquisition, retention, revenue, loyalty, and trust." While that may be the case, they did not fit our needs. We have a complex system and it did not seem to fit into our business.

Incentivized

Two-way authentication and ease of use. I've used several applications that just email a link but never ask for a verification code. By entering the verification code you are sure that the site is safe, secured, and reliable. Using Ping, we can ensure no one other than you will access the application using your credential as you can log in only after you confirm using the verification code that you receive on your personal email or device.

Incentivized

• Having monthly active users billing was cost-effective.
• Helped with the IT support that was already managing the Azure platform of the company; this helped to manage the costs better and optimize them.

Incentivized

• it is positive with saving the cost
• some drawback with aging solution
• directory is solid and provide lots of cost saving

Incentivized