Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Auth0 vs Thales SafeNet Trusted Access comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Auth0
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
5th
Ranking in Access Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (1st)
Thales SafeNet Trusted Access
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
20th
Ranking in Access Management
21st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of Auth0 is 9.1%, down from 12.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Thales SafeNet Trusted Access is 0.9%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

Serge Wautier - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplified integration with helpful support and decent pricing
Auth0 is used as an identity provider for our new SaaS platform to manage the identity of users Auth0 is cost-effective because it provides all the features we need, and it was very easy to integrate into our platform. The documentation is comprehensive, and their support team is highly helpful.…
GauravMathur - PeerSpot reviewer
Simple to use, easy to set up, and performs well
I'm not saying that we want to switch the product, however, since the requirement has increased, we are looking at other options that may be better suited. The scalability may not there. We have a few specific use cases where we have to avoid the cloud. Especially in Europe, we're not allowed to carry their phone in factories. We need some sort of secure access solution. There's a dependency on Microsoft Azure. I am paying to SafeNet and in parallel, I also need to pay Microsoft to use the same service. That makes no sense, to pay double. If they could do something about it, that would be very good.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It has improved our organization by providing login authentication for a mobile app."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"It supports identity federation, FSO and multi-tenancy."
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"It offers stronger security and flexibility with API keys, which are generated on runtime."
"It is very scalable because it provides a new environment for companies based on their number of users and other factors. The tool can take a lot of users."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"It's a very powerful platform. It has the ability to do the usual stuff, according to modern protocols, like OIDC and OAuth 2. But the real benefit of using the platform comes from its flexibility to enhance it with rules and, now, with what they call authentication pipelines. That is the most significant feature, as it allows you to customize everything regarding the authentication and authorization process."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The solution is simple to use."
"The validation and integrity features of the endpoint are great."
 

Cons

"I think they can do a better job in explaining what you're supposed to do next in order to correctly follow an idiomatic approach to using the solution beyond simply passing a JWT token to a server and having the server check then signature to validate the token."
"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"The tool's price should be improved."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"There is a possibility to improve the machine-to-machine authentication flow. This part of Auth0 is not really well documented, and we could really gain some additional knowledge on that."
"SafeNet's reporting and monitoring features could be improved."
"Lacks the ability to integrate network monitoring solutions and authenticate the app users."
"There's a dependency on Microsoft Azure."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a relatively inexpensive product in the industry."
"Pricing of Auth0 is a pain point. Their pricing model is very confusing, at least for an enterprise. I don't like their pricing model. I think it's too aggressive. It's not very cheap for a service that only does authentication."
"There are different price levels: B2B, B2C, and enterprise. The basic plan is about $1,500 per month."
"I am pretty happy with the pricing model of Auth0. It is very clear for me. Considering our scale, the features that we are using, and additional features that we bought, we still find it great. If you split the costs for the whole year and calculate the number of people you needed to hire, it always comes out to be much lesser than what we would have spent on building our own solution."
"The tool is cheaper compared to competing solutions. Those alternatives tended to be more expensive. Consequently, Okta purchased it because it was considerably cheaper. The solution even offered some free services while still providing excellent functionality."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
838,640 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Educational Organization
51%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Auth0?
It is very scalable because it provides a new environment for companies based on their number of users and other factors. The tool can take a lot of users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Auth0?
The cost of the solution itself was cost-effective enough that I didn't even need to compare it with EntraID.
What needs improvement with Auth0?
There is no immediate need for improvement. However, better documentation for Salesforce integration is suggested. Multi-factor authentication could be considered for future research.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
SafeNet Trusted Access, Gemalto SafeNet Trusted Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Airbnb 2. Accenture 3. Adidas 4. Atlassian 5. Audi 6. Baidu 7. BlackRock 8. Cisco 9. CocaCola 10. Dell 11. eBay 12. FedEx 13. Fiat Chrysler 14. Ford 15. Google 16. Groupon 17. Hewlett Packard Enterprise 18. IBM 19. Intel 20. LinkedIn 21. Mastercard 22. Mercedes Benz23. Microsoft 24. Nike 25. Oracle 26. PayPal 27. Pinterest 28. Qualcomm 29. SAP 30. Spotify 31. Tesla 32. Toyota
IBM, Western Union, Vanderbilt University Medical Centre, Novartis, and AT&T.
Find out what your peers are saying about Auth0 vs. Thales SafeNet Trusted Access and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
838,640 professionals have used our research since 2012.