Okta Platform Reviews

We've been using this solution for SSO and consolidation of IDs.

This solution brought us the SSO perspective, and this is the main reason we're using it.

The only thing I like about Okta Workforce Identity compared to other solutions in the market is that it's an easy resource that you can get, even if you're working with many users, but there is a lot to learn about it.

There are many things that Okta has to improve on. I understand that Okta has a lot of apps, like any other provider, e.g. Microsoft apps, IDP apps, or cloud identity apps.

The problem with Okta is that they create the app and they never update. In this fast-paced industry where versions keep getting updated, Okta is really slow at times.

None of the Okta applications that they create, for example, in my case: I have used the cloud identity of Microsoft apps and now I'm using the off tabs. What I found is none of the single Okta apps that we have worked and did not create an issue. They are not fully mature. So it's that aspect that can be improved, which Okta is investigating. Their application support and not having updates for those applications also need to be improved. These are the things that surprised me and I was not able to understand from Okta.

Okta's customer support should be improved.

Okta should work with certain providers, e.g. the Google cloud, the AWS cloud, the Microsoft cloud, and they should evaluate the integration point because what happens is if your organization has SSO which relies on Okta, all of these three clouds and the Okta app are far from perfect. You are not able to get the right setup based on how your security is trying to define it vs what the application can support. You'll end up using the default interface Okta provides with those apps.

I understand Okta could say that if they shouldn't worry about it because if AWS wanted to support Okta, then AWS should be the one providing us the app and support, but Okta should try to understand the users, do surveys from the different automation using Okta, and use different apps because those apps are very critical. They are far from perfect, so Okta has the worst implementation.

I've used this solution in the last 12 months. We've been using it for six years.

This solution is stable and reliable. We didn't find the solution itself hard to use.

The scalability of this solution is bad. Scalability has two or three different meanings to it.

Is it scalable from the infrastructure side of it? The answer is yes.

Is this scalable from the business perspective? The answer is no. For example, the B2B and the B2C solutions that others provide, those aspects in Okta are completely lacking.

For example, if I have the Microsoft Azure Active Directory, I have the B2C, B2B, and the phase rate, so I have a way to not only support my enterprise but my end customers in a very fast manner. In the case of Okta, that whole path is a nightmare to work with.

I didn't like Okta's support. They say they have very good support, but the moment you create a ticket, they will tell you that they provide the app, but they cannot provide support because we connected the app to another environment, or to another side of the spectrum. This seemed very odd to me.

First, we are using the application you specified, then you say you cannot support this application just because the value provided is outside of this application, so you cannot troubleshoot or help us to troubleshoot if we open a ticket. Every single time it's a chicken and egg type of situation. From that perspective, Okta's support is horrible.

The setup was straightforward. Nowadays, all the other IDPs are the same way, too. I didn't find a single IDP that had no experience at the level, and all of them can stand up at the same time, within the same time frame.

With Okta, on the other hand, the requirement to have the ID server in between, whether it's the cloud-based ID server specified, or the on-prem base, like ours: It's on-prem, but what I found was that we were not able to do it even after following all the guidance unless we had a dedicated Okta person to help us do it. It was a different situation with Microsoft and cloud IDP which were easy to set up, as we were able to do it ourselves just by following the documentation.

We implemented the solution through an integrator consultant. They are fine. They are doing the job on a daily basis.

This solution is costly.

With Microsoft, you get the exact same information that Okta gives out of the box: free, because that's what Microsoft does, and even if I compare to other cloud IDPs, with Okta, access may offer free access for startups, and if you have fewer users, it's okay. Pricing is decent. The moment you talk about the enterprise level, for example, we were talking about implementing Okta across the US with multiple customers, and the cost they gave us was two million dollars. The cost is not justified for the single assets of this solution, so Okta is bad in those terms.

We've been evaluating Microsoft Azure Active Directory. It's still in the POC phase, and it's been three or four months. We have very particular requirements, e.g. a mix of multiple IDPs with Okta, and Azure Active Directory is one of them, but that is the only one where we don't have the solution. We are trying to do the POCs first to ensure that they are able to meet our needs.

The reports I downloaded were very informative. The things that we were trying to do is generally the One ID and software entitlement. Our customers find them more useful than the Microsoft Azure side of it. They know that the functionality exists and they are able to use that functionality, but the intuitive nature of managing the entitlement was not there. We also had a requirement where we wanted to mix the Okta in between, for the SSO, so I was trying to collect as much information as I can get and that information was helpful.

Whenever you search for the Okta documentation, for example, if we search for cloud IDP and Microsoft-related documentation, it's only on Microsoft's site we get the help we need, including help from the community. Okta's community, when you Google it, is lacking because it only contains help or information about Okta products because Okta users are only able to use the product in a standard way.

This surprised me especially because Okta has such a good name, but the bottom line is, if you ask me as a decision-maker or the one who influences decisions in our organization, if I was going to choose Okta as our SSO provider, my answer will be flat NO.

The initial implementation of this solution took three months. It's a very simple and standard implementation, so that's never been a problem.

A hundred users are currently using this solution in our organization. It doesn't require heavy maintenance.

Working with Okta can be restrictive, and this is where Okta doesn't shine.

This solution is being used extensively in our organization. Increasing its usage will depend on whether they are able to convince the Infotech folks, and that's what's happening.

The advice I would give to others looking into implementing this solution is for them to first try to understand it. They should not confine themselves to selecting Okta, thinking that it's the end solution. They should look at their future needs too because once they implement Okta without considering their future needs, they will have to do a lot of hacks and tricks. Before they even delve into Okta, they have to first think about their future and how much this solution will cost in the long run.

This solution meets the need, but that's all, so I'm rating it a six out of ten.

I have used Okta for security purposes. It grants access only when you have the proper credentials, which I find essential for utilizing new technologies and web applications.

The most valuable feature of Okta is its security. You can only log in if you have the access, which protects the applications by avoiding cross-site scripting. Hackers cannot access the system directly. Only after receiving a message from Okta, you can log in, making it highly secure.

We are facing one issue with Cypress test cases. Whenever I write Cypress test cases, we encounter problems with logging in through Okta. There is no proper documentation on integrating test cases with Okta, and this issue is troubling whenever I try to implement it.

Okta is a stable product.

Currently, scalability is a top priority, but there are no issues with adding many users to Okta.

Before Okta, I manually created portals using a username and password stored in a database. Okta introduced a different process.

Initially, it was complicated to set up since I was a beginner and there was no proper documentation. Now that I am more experienced, it is easier to handle.

I need to analyze fully in the future, and if I do not have any concerns, I will share any with you via LinkedIn. As of now, I do not have any additional advice.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The primary use cases are SSO, user management, and SSO integration with various cloud services, including AWS, GCP, GitHub, etc.

The tool provides a single place of contact for managing users. We only need to manage users in Okta Workforce Identity, eliminating the need to duplicate efforts across different systems. For example, if a user needs to be decommissioned, we don't have to go through all the systems and cloud services; we delete the user in one place. This process is automated with our HR system for both organizations, simplifying user lifecycle management.

The main features we find most valuable are the single sign-on and the OTP authentication. The ability to connect via a PC or a mobile phone makes the process seamless.

The MFA feature enhances regular authentication through the user portal and utilizes one-time passwords generated from QR codes on mobile devices.

We faced some challenges during the Okta Identity Workforce deployment. Integrating with AWS and other cloud services posed some limitations with federated options. For instance, features like automatic user addition from AWS to the tool were missing, requiring manual intervention. The API is limited compared to the manual configuration possible through the UI.

I think Okta Workforce Identity could improve by making its API more robust, ensuring that all UI capabilities are exposed in the API. This is particularly important for integrating with other applications, such as AWS and other cloud providers.

I have been working with the product for six years. 

The licensing model is fine for general service usage. However, the charges for API features and API tokens can be quite high.

I would give Okta Workforce Identity a solid eight out of ten. There's always room for improvement, but overall, the tool performs well and meets our needs. The solution was my first experience with such products. Previously, I had used internal tools like Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Active Directory services within Azure, which were excellent for corporate environments. However, I find Okta Workforce Identity more suitable for startups.

I use the solution mostly to integrate into Active Directory to get MFA and other IAM features. In Okta, we can get features similar to those in Active Directory. We also use the tool for authorization and other zero-trust authentication.

We can integrate two-factor authentication with the applications. Two-factor authentication is used for mobile applications like OneDrive.

The product must be provided for free. We cannot substantiate the cost with the features provided by the tool. Microsoft provides similar features for free. I don’t see any extra features in Okta.

I have been using the solution for more than five to ten years.

The tool is not free. However, Microsoft is free. So, people prefer Microsoft.

If we wanted to access the Azure portal or any other portal, we used to scan with Authenticator. Once it was approved, we accessed the portals. The product is equivalent to Microsoft’s solution. I used Duo instead of Authenticator to authorize applications. People use Conditional Access Policy. People generally prefer Microsoft because it is free. I will recommend the tool to others. Our recommendations are based on the customer’s requirements, bandwidth, and budget. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We have been using this tool for access management. Our client has connected their app's security with Okta Workforce Identity. We have used LinkedIn's libraries to integrate it with various apps, including Oracle and others.

Workforce Identity offers a comprehensive access management solution with multi-factor authentication, total control, and features like app access management, identity governance, and administration tools such as certification and access request management. These are typically found in identity management solutions, but Okta integrates them seamlessly into its user interface.      

They should focus on providing top-notch team access management to companies.

I have been working with Okta Workforce Identity for the past 10 months.

It has proven to be stable in the time I've used it. If there are any challenges, their support team has been responsive and helpful. Overall, my experience with them has been positive.

It's scalable, but we need to coordinate with Okta's support team or our account manager if we want to increase our workload. Since it's a complete SaaS solution, they can make the necessary adjustments accordingly.

As premium customers, we have the opportunity to schedule calls directly with Okta's expert team members for discussions and support. It's a valuable perk of being a premium user.

Positive

I haven't personally handled the deployment, but I've worked on configuring the printer, which wasn't too complex. As for deployment time and manpower, it's a bit different since Okta Workforce Identity is a cloud-based platform. We don't need dedicated servers as Okta manages integration. We work on our own tenants, and Okta provides preview environments for testing new features. As for maintenance, it's not too difficult, especially for premium customers who can raise support tickets if needed.

I received good support for addressing some bugs, although there were delays in fixing them due to the product backlog and prioritization process at Okta. The resolution time depended on how they prioritized issues, which sometimes caused delays. Overall, I would rate it 7 out of 10.  

Our organization only uses Okta for single sign-on. Everybody is working from home, so we need a multi-factor authentication solution for remote users. We have around 70,000 users. 

Okta integrates well with other solutions. Once you have integrated an application into Okta and onboarded a user, they will be onboarded for just-in-time provisioning. 

The error logging could be improved. Okta doesn't provide enough details when you are troubleshooting an issue. It's often difficult to fix it from our end, so we always need additional support from Okta.

I have worked with Okta for two years.

I rate Okta six out of 10 for stability. We don't see many bugs, but the product doesn't support some of our custom requirements. We have to submit feature requests that they implement later. 

I rate Okta six out of 10 for scalability. In January, they were doing something on their side, and a cell was down. The US was completely down, and most users had problems logging into. Okta confirmed that auto-scaling was not happening properly from their end.

I rate Okta support eight out of 10. 

Positive

The company used RSA before I joined. I believe they switched because they preferred a SaaS platform, and RSA was late to adopt this model. RSA is excellent as an on-prem solution, but they didn't transition to the cloud until later. 

I rate Okta eight out of 10 for ease of setup. It's a SaaS product. You can configure it in a few hours. It takes additional time if you use on-prem agents. Active Directory has some other agents that must be integrated. It will take additional time. Otherwise, it won't take much time. You need three people at most to deploy it. Usually, one person deploys the solution, and two other people are on standby. 

I rate Okta Workforce Identity eight out of 10. 

We are using Okta Customer Identity for single sign-on. For example, if there is an organization that wants to have a user use one credential, user name, and password, and log into multiple applications. Then in that case you can use the Okta Customer Identity single sign-on tool.

The most valuable features of Okta Customer Identity are there is no infrastructure cost, integrated, has plenty of documentation, and is user-friendly.

There is an access request system that is very limited access to the systems available for end-users. The access request should improve in Okta Customer Identity.

I have been using Okta Customer Identity for approximately two years.

Okta Customer Identity is stable.

I have found Okta Customer Identity to be scalable.

We have many people using this solution.

The technical support of Okta Customer Identity is very prompt in responding.

The initial setup of Okta Customer Identity is easy. Once we have the application registered we can use it. It does not take long.

Our solution team implements the solution and since it is a SaaS solution it is simple.

Okta Customer Identity is not an expensive solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Okta Customer Identity an eight out of ten.

We are using Okta for authentication. It provides identity. We are using it as an identity provider. Single sign-on is the primary use case here. We use it for our customers and our employees.

I'm using it as a single sign-on. Pretty much it is solving my purpose of having to not remember so many passwords. 

It is very seamless. You have access to ten different apps, which are hosted on-premise or in the cloud. A single sign-on really helps me to make things faster.

It s easy to set up.

The solution works well. I can't speak to any areas of improvement. 

In the future, we'd like to see the product implement more security features, like, for example, zero-trust.

We've been using the solution for the last three years. 

The product is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. it's reliable.

It's a cloud service, so you pay for the license and you will get that level of entitlement. Scaling is never a problem. Just you need to pay for the extra subscription. That's all. 

We have 8,000 employees that use the product currently. 

It's been used quite regularly, especially during the pandemic when many people had to work from home. 

I have not used any other solution, although I do know there are many other players in the space. 

It's a cloud service. The setup is just a touch of a button. It's very easy for an end-user to use it. For administrators, there might be a few other things they need to carry out, however, for end-users, it's just a touch of a button. Nothing is needed from the installation perspective.

I'd rate the solution four out of five in terms of ease of setup.

I'm not involved in the procurement and I'm not maintaining it, therefore, I am not really sure about the cost.

I'm just a user, just an employee who is using this identity provider, and it is completely managed by our administrators.

I'd recommend the solution to other users. 

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.