IBM Tivoli Federated Identity Manager vs Symantec Siteminder comparison

"IBM Tivoli Federated Identity Manager is a good solution. It's both stable and scalable."

"You can quickly deploy the entire product with a basic config within couple of hours."

"I liked the debugging part. There are only two files (trace file and log file) that you need to look into while performing debugging, and the logs give you the exact info on where and what needs to be fixed."

"It's quite scalable."

"The feature that I mostly valued is the ease of installation on different systems, especially on Windows."

"That seamless integration significantly improves user experience and efficiency."

"Authentication & Authorization are important because all the sites need authentication for security purposes. That has been handled pretty well all these years with SSO."

"IWA is an out-of-the-box feature. The SAML-based federation is standard for all tools. However, CA Single Sign-On has made the federation configuration way too simple and handy to set up and use."

"It has the ability to authenticate and authorize users. It is the main feature for our security."

"It would be better if the administration and configurations were more straightforward. The architectural level is also quite complex."

"The main thing is we do not have the traceability and good monitoring that CA can provide us to capture problems when they occur."

"The tech support has not been very good for us so we don't use them anymore. We have had some issues. Nobody is perfect."

"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."

"The Federation part of CA Single Sign On, it's a bit complex to implement because it involves the SSL certificates, exchange of certificates, and lot of technical details. The documentation misses some important parts of this, so that's the reason it took some time for us to go live."

"In future releases, I would like to see maybe more capabilities with some more modern authentication."

"Symantec SiteMinder is not easy to set up and maintain at an infrastructure level."

"The GUIs are not very clear, especially when integrating with other products from CA."

"Better documentation. I went through some sessions on single sign-on for version 12.7."

"Our customers pay for the license every year or every three years. It's not available on a monthly basis."

"CA solutions are generally expensive but for the customer the ROI is big."

"Siteminder is a little costly. You pay for licensing, and they offer packages, so if you have less users, then you have to buy different products at different prices. If you have more of a user base, then the package is different. They also include other features—for example, if you have a database and you're using Siteminder, then it's good to use a Semantic-specific database, but if you are using less, then you have to purchase the database separately. Whereas if you are going for a bigger license, then it comes within the package. It depends on which plan you are using."

"I recommend conducting a PoC on every available product before choose one."

"The pricing is reasonable."

"The price is quite comparable to the other enterprise-level solutions in that market."

"Symantec Siteminder is expensive; they could definitely do better on the price."

"The solution's pricing is competitive."

"The licensing is fair for this solution."