We performed a comparison between Oracle Identity Governance and SailPoint IdentityIQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two User Provisioning Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are able to onboard new user accounts much faster by automating the process and standardizing our operations globally. Previously, there were many individual processes and manual admin interactions. We also see a lot of cost savings and benefits because through automation and standardization."
"The most valuable feature in Omada is the governance. We work with other products and other product vendors, but the sweet spot in the market for Omada is where things are heavy on governance."
"User-friendly solution."
"The Governance and self-service that can be set up so you can use them yourself to work in the system are the most valuable features. End users can be enabled to help themselves."
"As an administrator, we benefit from a lot of functionality that is available out of the box, but it is also configurable to meet our specific needs."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to set up connectors to various IT systems and offer a wide range of supported connectors."
"The best feature in Omada Identity is that it enables us to implement standardized employee life cycle processes so that we don't have to create them ourselves. We can then use the standard workflows. The breadth and scope of the solution’s IGA features also fulfill our requirements."
"The most valuable feature of Omada is its API connectivity, which allows seamless integration with various services like SAP, GRC, and Microsoft licenses."
"The support service of Oracle is good. We use it a lot and their response is quick."
"The one thing that stands out was is the automatic sign-out when an employee goes on vacation. Identity Governance can monitor when an employee goes on vacation and returns. We use this feature to automatically disable all the employee's accounts when they go on vacation, and they're automatically enabled when they come back."
"I am able to request any access rights I need."
"The most valuable feature is the user manager certification that approves or removes user access."
"What I found most useful in Oracle Identity Governance, feature-wise, are provisioning, de-provisioning, and termination. Those features are very good. Oracle Identity Governance can also be easily integrated with non-Oracle products, which I find valuable."
"The most valuable features in Oracle Identity Governance are identity and access management."
"Password management is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of Oracle Identity Governance is user lifecycle management. Certification is also a valuable feature of the solution. Oracle Identity Governance allows you to assign who has access to what, which is its basic feature."
"The initial setup isn't so difficult."
"The basic concept is most valuable. I like how they have designed the solution. They create an Identity Cube, and then they do all the processes and configuration around the Identity Cube."
"We are happy with the SailPoint IdentityIQ’s stability."
"What I like most about SailPoint IdentityIQ is that it's simple to use and easy to configure and deploy."
"It is simple and easy to implement."
"Access certification and provisioning are two of the solutions most valuable features."
"It is a scalable product."
"It is a stable tool, which we run in our complex environment."
"The solution should be made more agile for customers to own or configure."
"When you do a recalculation of an identity, it's hard to understand what was incorrect before you started the recalculation, and which values are actually updated... all you see are all the new fields that are provisioned, instead of seeing only the fields that are changed."
"It is not possible to customize reports on Omada Identity."
"There's a challenge with handling large amounts of data in this system."
"I would like more training. As someone who is new to this world, I don't feel that the courses Omada provides are good enough. They should also improve the documentation. It is difficult to learn how to use the solution by yourself"
"Omada's performance could be better because we had some latency issues. Still, it's difficult to say how much of that is due to Omada versus the resources used by our other vendors in our on-prem environment. Considering the resources we have invested into making it run well, it's slightly slower than we would expect."
"If I had to name one thing, it would be the user interface (UI)."
"Omada Identity has two main issues that need to be solved or improved the most. One is its setup or installation process because it's complex and cumbersome. I'm talking about the process for on-premises deployment because I've never tried the cloud version of Omada Identity. Setting up the cloud version should be much easier. The second area for improvement in Omada Identity is that it's piggybacking on Microsoft's complex way of having all kinds of add-ons, extensions, or setups, whether small or large, such as the new SQL Server, and it's cumbersome to make sure that everything works. Omada Identity is a complex solution and could still be improved."
"They need to improve their backup strategy."
"It would be great if the Oracle Fusion Middleware team worked on making it compatible with other application servers, as it exists in OIM9.x."
"Simplify & add more functionality to Identity Cloud Service (IDCS)."
"The cost of this product needs to be reduced."
"Automation of validation exercises performed by humans over Recon Exceptions generated as a result of an access synchronization event over a user's need for access or not."
"Oracle Identity Governance, particularly version 12c, can handle multiple scenarios, but for a regular user, I found the use cases not that extensive, so this is an area for improvement. The implementation process for Oracle Identity Governance is also a bit more complex than how you implement competitor products, and this is another area for improvement in the solution. Technical support for Oracle Identity Governance also needs some improvement. Another area for improvement in Oracle Identity Governance is its documentation. Currently, it's lacking when compared to SailPoint. What I'd like to see in the next release of Oracle Identity Governance is a bit more scope for AI-based Identity governance. If the solution has built-in intelligence, that will give it more leverage. Another feature I'd like to see in Oracle Identity Governance in the future is the option for managers to provide access to others via mobile devices or phones."
"The product design has some complications for doing some use cases. I would like to see easier onboarding of applications and easier ways to plugin the customization codes."
"I would like to see automation in the solution. We need also integration with the Identity Manager. The solution needs to improve in the application integrations part. It also needs to focus on application deployment as well."
"Scalability is hard, especially when you are doing it in real time."
"Compared to at least one other product some of the administrative tasks could be easier or more intuitive."
"The connector for EPIC, ServiceNow, and Duo."
"The connectors are far too manual. This needs to be automated a bit."
"There is a need for further enhancements, specifically in the multifactor authentication capabilities."
"The product’s cloud offering could be flexible."
"It is too technical. You need really good technical skills in Java and other technologies, which are hard to find. If they can make it easier so that things can be done with a few clicks, it will be great."
"The advanced provisioning features require more improvement."
Oracle Identity Governance is ranked 4th in User Provisioning Software with 66 reviews while SailPoint IdentityIQ is ranked 1st in User Provisioning Software with 61 reviews. Oracle Identity Governance is rated 7.4, while SailPoint IdentityIQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Oracle Identity Governance writes "A scalable solution designed to meet the requirements of medium and large-sized companies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SailPoint IdentityIQ writes "Flexible, easy to customize, and not too difficult to set up". Oracle Identity Governance is most compared with One Identity Manager, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Saviynt, Microsoft Identity Manager and ForgeRock, whereas SailPoint IdentityIQ is most compared with Saviynt, One Identity Manager, Microsoft Entra ID, ForgeRock and NetIQ Identity Manager. See our Oracle Identity Governance vs. SailPoint IdentityIQ report.
See our list of best User Provisioning Software vendors and best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all User Provisioning Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Here follow my inputs about your questions concerning SailPoint IQ and Oracle.
WHERE DOES IT COMES FROM?
1. As representatives of SailPoint told me in 2008, SailPoint IQ was designed in 2005 by reusing the functional and technical requirements of SocGen Corporate Investment Banking (I participated to the initial design in 2004 in Paris… we live in a small world).
2. Oracle Identity Governance was formerly RBAC X purchased by Sun Microsystems then selected as the Identity Analytics components by Oracle.
WHAT ARE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THAT?
Both solutions are based on the Role Based Access Control model (RBAC) consisting of telling who occupies some business roles to be granted more or less consistent list of authorizations.
This is a model of the second generation while the NIST envisioned up to 6 generations in 2009! So… it’s a pretty old model.
IF ONE ORGANIZATION SUCCEEDS TO MAKE IT WITH RBAC
If one succeeds to implement this model, then it is possible to tell:
1. Who should have access to what by occupying a role that has to be mined with a half automated process that is pretty laboring and expensive,
2. Who has ‘’out role’’ entitlements to be terminated. Reviews of entitlements can be focused on ‘’Out roles’’ and even if they don’t understand the descriptions of authorizations, managers can take a decision.
HEAVY PREREQUISITES TO MAKE IT
LABOR, TIME AND CASH BECAUSE OF HEAVY PREREQUISITES
If one large organization is willing to satisfy the core prerequisite of these 2 solutions, it is necessary:
1. to spend 30 to 60 minutes for each department of an organization to mine User Roles and to associate a list of authorizations that are impossible to understand by any business analyst,
2. then spend about an hour with each manager to validate the roles and associated entitlements (impossible to understand by managers as well),
3. last but not least, implement the roles and lists of entitlements.
REAL USE CASE IN THE USA
Large organizations are totally unable to implement such an approach for following reasons:
1. ..X for example used SailPoint IQ and mined 1.500 roles instead of estimated 15.000 (low estimation),
2. ..X was unable to validate roles because managers could not understand labels of authorizations such as: ZZX00152, ZX215521, zz_top_group_senior,…
3. it would have been:
a. too long to make it for 126.000 employees / 10 team members in average = 12.600 work units located in about 100 countries * 30 minutes in average = 787 man days without vacations, travels, coordination!
b. too expensive:
i. 1 role analyst * 30 minutes in average * 80$ per hour * 12.600 units = 504.000$ for role mining only
ii. 1 role analyst + 1 manager * 220$ per hour * 12.600 units = 2.772 K$ for role validation
iii. Implementation of roles into IAM solution such as Oracle Identity Manager or IBM SIM is a technical thing that costs more…
IF ONE ORGANIZATION CANNOT MAKE IT BECAUSE MANAGERS DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT MEANS ‘’ZX023455``
SailPoint and Oracle have nice features to add translations to entitlements.
The thing is that where you have several ten thousand labels to translate…
* it takes time and lots of $ before to deliver.
* People around a table will take time to come to a shared understanding (if they are very motivated)
IF ONE ORGANIZATION CANNOT MAKE IT BECAUSE IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO TRANSLATE ‘’ZX023455``
* SailPoint proposes to use Risk Based approach and to add Risk Criteria to several ten thousands labels… (sic) to be considered from a Risk Standpoint…
* Oracle proposes to use indicators and requests and to let managers think about a decision to be taken thanks to dashboards and reports. Some kind of Business Intelligence.
WHAT IS THE OPTION?
1. ...X came to the conclusion that it was not possible to make it with SailPoint IQ alone. A custom algorithm is necessary to enhance SailPoint capabilities.
2. The Gartner Group exposed the issue for the last 3 years. Advanced analytics and Self Learning systems will make it.
3. We, at EasyPatternZ:
a. are the first to make it with Artificial Intelligence.
b. take about 5 seconds per work unit in average to deliver the answer to the question ‘’Who has access to what, why, whatever the circumstances’’ better and faster than any leader.
c. made it 3 times since 2013. The Federal Government of Canada will qualify it between April and July this year with 23.000 employees.
d. Are watched by USCIS.
My experience in IAM is with HPE Aruba ClearPass & Cisco ISE. A couple of other competing products, such as the ForeScout and Auconet products that were evaluated at a high level, but didn’t progress further.
I’m not at all familiar with Sailpoint IdentityIQ and Oracle Identity Governance and couldn’t provide any meaningful insight into either of them.
I am not an SC so my response is very salesy :).
Sailpiont is more of a next gen solution in the IAM space.
If an organization was a huge Oracle shop I would have them consider Oracle – if not I would be heading to Sailpoint.
*Sailpoint is as robust but does not have the legacy issues that Oracle has to deal with which makes it easier to implement/operate
Sailpoint will also be lower in price.
Basically the question is 'what will you achive ?'. I agree with the comment above, Oracle is known to have a high TCO due to complexity. The fact is also that Oracle claims to ease the end-user experience but this mean a mandatory extensive preparation in order to provide users with accurate and in context information. Sailpoint IIQ is probably easier to implement and indeed is efficient in respect of RBAC and ABAC or preferably some kind of hybrid modeling. Don't forget IAM needs a very good preparation (analysis, modeling, inventory, classification, process analysis etc.) From my experience, IIQ is able to respond to complex needs and is far cheaper than Oracle and this allows to invest in added value activities (extra licence). Sorry if this is not a factual response in terms of pros & conts between OIG and IIQ but IIQ is more affordable and from my point of view covers all needed capabilities to build a strong IAM solution.
I think at a high level, both are going to provide the same functions. You'll see the main differences in how one has to implement workflows, UIs, and rules. Where Oracle uses BPML, ADF and OES, respectively, SailPoint is more Java-centric, IMHO. I found OIG's SOD rule definition UI hard to use and some serious limitations in its hierarchal role model. I think SailPoint has surpassed OIG in its extensibility with the framework in its 7.0 release. I would definitely evaluate roadmap if you want to stay on-prem.