We performed a comparison between Imanami GroupID and One Identity Active Roles 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."For each job code, we go through and determine the access they're supposed to have to the system. Based on that job code, we use the query tool and say that anybody who is in this job code gets these groups added to them, or conversely, if they change job codes, it removes the ones that they shouldn't have and adds the one they should. That runs every night, and the next day, everybody has the job codes they're supposed to have."
"I have found the overall features to be useful."
"Imanami GroupID's UI is good."
"It provides automatic provisioning/update/deprovisioning workflows from a source system to a target system."
"In comparison to native Active Directory tools, using Active Roles for delegation is so much better. It uses an access template and that makes it easy to see who can access what. In fact, you can do that for many objects as well."
"Instead of deleting accounts, we like the deprovision option so that we can reverse any accidental deletions. It also gives a higher level of quality control in terms of enforcing any number of variables, such as making sure that an account has a description entered before the account can be created. We can backtrack and know the history of it that way."
"The most valuable features include auditing, dynamic grouping, and creating dynamic groups based on AD attributes."
"Having a tool to manage all changes to AD from a single pane of glass is awesome."
"Another good feature is the change history. It's centralized in a single place and allows us to manage people's Active Directory domains from a central location. We can also drill down into individual objects in a troubleshooting or even an auditing situation. We can show evidence to auditors by drilling down into the individual history. It gives you all the history of what happened around an individual object. That is something that would be almost impossible to do in Active Directory, or extremely complicated."
"The solution is stable."
"The AD and AAD management features of this solution are really good... They offer added value by showing more fields such as password age and the statuses of some things that we normally wouldn't see."
"The mobile application needs to be improved and there should be chatbox features to allow users to easily reach out for assistance."
"I'd like to see a better user interface. It works, but it is clunky. There should be better import and export of LDAP queries and better management tools."
"The product's implementation is complex. It should also work on GPO."
"In terms of improvement, it could be made even more user-friendly for administrators when they need to create new workflows and rule sets."
"There are some features that we think should be included in their next release. We think these things would take them to the next level: the ability to completely force or limit any dynamic group processing to specific servers, change-tracking reporting of virtual attributes, and the ability to use files as inputs to automation workloads. These things have also been talked about. Knowing them, they're probably working on them."
"The solution needs an attestation process that includes certification and recertification attestation."
"The ability to send logs to a SIEM would be very beneficial."
"The third area for improvement, which is the weakest portion of ARS, is the workflow engine, which was introduced a few years ago. It's slow and not very intuitive to use, so I would like to see improvement there."
"The user and group management in Azure AD could be better. Our focus these days is dynamic sharing with several on-prem Microsoft applications like SharePoint."
"Another issue we have with the product is that we run a lot of custom tasks. You have to program them to run on one particular host and there's no automatic failover to a second host. If that host is down when a task is supposed to run, it has to wait until the next time it runs when that host is up."
"Most of the time it just works."
Imanami GroupID is ranked 10th in User Provisioning Software with 3 reviews while One Identity Active Roles is ranked 5th in User Provisioning Software with 17 reviews. Imanami GroupID is rated 8.4, while One Identity Active Roles is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Imanami GroupID writes "Simplifies the task of managing groups and is affordable and easy to implement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of One Identity Active Roles writes "Single interface and workflows simplify AD and Azure AD management efficiency and security". Imanami GroupID is most compared with Netwrix Auditor, ManageEngine ADManager Plus and SailPoint IdentityIQ, whereas One Identity Active Roles is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, ManageEngine ADManager Plus, SailPoint IdentityIQ, One Identity Manager and Softerra Adaxes. See our Imanami GroupID vs. One Identity Active Roles report.
See our list of best User Provisioning Software vendors and best Active Directory Management 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.