Ping Identity Platform Reviews

We use the product to run different reports. 

We have encountered instances where it is not easy to do authentication. 

I have been using the product for two years. 

I would rate the tool's stability a ten out of ten. 

My company has 1000 users for the product. 

My experience with the support team is good. 

The product's setup is easy if you have all the information and support. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

People use the solution to secure their applications and authenticate particular processes.

In access token management, we have to attach a certificate. In that column, I have to enable the search option to edit certificates. We can choose a drop-down to search for which certificate we have to create, which is difficult.

I have been using Ping Identity Platform for more than two and a half years.

Ping Identity Platform is a stable solution.

A lot of users from our company are using the solution globally.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution.

Recommending the solution to other users depends on their application. If fewer people use your application, you can set up the tool in a quality environment. You can also use Ping Identity Platform to secure your application by restricting access to a few people.

It is not easy for someone to learn to use the solution for the first time, but at the same time, it's not very difficult to learn.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use PingID for multifactor authentication, passwordless login, and push notifications. 

I like the self-service feature. The 502 and UBP systems are also excellent. PingID's ability to authenticate with SSH, RDP, and Windows login is pretty handy. It covers the entire spectrum of use.

PingID's device management portal should be more easily accessible via a link. They provide no link to the portal like they do for the service. The passwordless functionality could be more comprehensive. You can't filter based on hardware devices. Having that filtering option would be great. Device authentication would be a great feature. 

We have used PingID for five years.

Early on, there were many changes to PingID because the company was trying to address some security vulnerabilities, but we only faced outages twice in three years due to these updates.  It's fairly stable overall. 

PingID's scalability is good. We haven't had any issues, but we don't have a huge amount of traffic. My organization has around 150,000 users. 

We've had issues with incorrect reporting and needed to contact support. Reports were missing values, or the details weren't clear. We had a quick resolution 80 percent of the time. 

Positive

I rate PingID seven out of 10 for ease of setup. It takes less than a day to deploy in one environment. It's a cloud-based solution, so you only need to set up an account and link it to your on-prem environment using an adapter. 

I rate PingID eight out of 10. I would recommend it depending on the use case. You need to clarify your requirements before implementing the solution. 

We have integrated PingID with different applications. Mainly the internet-facing applications. 

PingID is very good. 

It's pretty stable as a product.

We've never faced any issues, at least with the data applications integration.

The customers really like it.

The mobile application is very good.

Many times when we are authenticating, we'd like the freedom to set the time. Maybe it needs to be slightly longer. I understand that this is work based on the token exchange and so on. The timing of the token validity, if it could be extended, would be great. I'm not sure if there is even an option to configure these types of settings. 

Before we can authenticate it, it ends up in an error. And then we'll have to create everything all over again, in terms of launching the application.

I'm not sure if the experience on the desktop is good or not. I've heard some feedback that it's not that good. It's better to use it on mobile. Perhaps the user experience on the desktop Ping application could be improved. I haven't used it personally. I just heard from my colleagues about some experience with that.

I have probably been working with the solution for about two years or so.

The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

Almost everyone is working on the solution. It's used company-wide. All these people consume this application, however, it's really a central team who does the provisioning of the services to the entire organization.

I've never reached out for technical support due to the fact that we have an internal team here in Germany. They are providing this as a service to the other regions a well. We haven't needed the assistance of the product's technical support.

We also use Symantec SiteMinder. We are using both, however, we will completely switch to PingID in the future.

I can't speak to the initial setup process. In terms of maintenance, the number of people needed depends on the central team's capability or capacity.

We don't directly deal with the licenses. It's basically purchased by the central team and we are just consuming it through the common APIs. I really couldn't comment on the pricing at the moment.

We are considering switching to other products. Therefore, we're looking to evaluate other options. We are looking to have a seamless single sign-on and federated authentication.

We are a customer and an end-user.

Currently, the solution fulfills the use cases that we currently have. That's pretty much it. I'm not sure about the configuration or on the infrastructure side. Maybe the team who does this infrastructure setup would have better insights. However, overall, it's a pretty seamless experience, I would say.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities. We can do a lot of configurations. It is a fairly good product for workforce identity management.

The product is not customizable. It is not suitable for consumer identity management.

I have been working with the product for two years.

Our clients are mainly government entities and big investment firms.

The technical support is not proactive. If an issue or concern is raised, the support person must jump on a call as soon as possible, but it is not happening now.

Neutral

We also recommend ForgeRock. It is used for access management. It doesn’t have many configurations but allows customizations. We can achieve a lot of things using customizations. Wherever PingID is not suitable for the customer, we ask them to choose ForgeRock so that we can customize it as per the requirements and deliver the solution.

The tool is very easy to set up.

The product is costly. Large organizations can afford it. However, it is not suitable for smaller companies. Smaller organizations can choose Okta or One Identity.

We recommend the product to our customers. Organizations can buy the product if they are ready to spend a lot of money. They must be aware that the support is average. However, the tool is very good. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We primarily use PingFederate for access management authentication. It is mainly for authenticating employees, but we sometimes use it to authenticate customer applications. 

PingFederate gives you granular control over the settings. There are many options for fine-tuning policies. 

PingFederate's UI could be streamlined. They have recently made several improvements, but it's still too complex. It's a common complaint. The configuration should be simplified because the learning curve is too steep. 

PingFederate is stable. 

PingFederate is an efficient solution, but the scalability depends on the environment. It's an on-prem solution, so it depends on the number of servers we have. We have around 150,000 users. 

Deploying PingFederate is straightforward. The deployment time depends on the size of your environment and the things you need to do to get it working, such as configuring the server and the firewall rules. Installing it is simple, but you might need to spend a week configuring it to work in your environment. 

I rate PingFederate eight out of 10. 

I am a reseller for PingID.

This is a user-friendly solution.

I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved.

I have been using PingID as an end user for about four years.

This is a stable solution.

This is a scalable solution.

I have not needed to contact support yet.

Ping is a suitable on-premise Active Directory in the IT environment.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I am a consultant and this is one of the solutions that I implement for my clients.

It is used for the federation integration of the whole organization.

The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication.

Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported.

There are challenges when it comes to setting up this solution for external IP usage.

I have been using PingFederate for about a year.

It is a stable solution.

PingFederate is scalable. My customers are enterprise-level organizations with more than 1,000 users.

Technical support for PingFederate is fine.

I have experience with Keycloak, which I find to be a comparable solution. I think that the big difference between them is the multifactor aspect.

The initial setup is ok. I would say that it is manageable.

PingFederate is a good product but there are limitations. It is a good solution especially if it's an internal IP usage customer. For external customers, they do have challenges, although there are solutions for that available, as well.

Overall, it is a good product with some integration limitations.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.