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

Imprivata OneSign vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Imprivata OneSign
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
19th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (5th), Data Governance (6th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (5th), Access Management (3rd), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

IS
Reasonably priced, performs well, easy to deploy, and has responsive technical support
We use Imprivata OneSign for the single sign-on Imprivata supports single sign-on. OneSign is the name itself. It provides a service that allows users to sign in to whatever application they are using. This is the most important feature of this solution. The deployment is very quick, and the…
Dilip Reddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use but requires improvements in the area of stability
In my company, we have worked on authorization, and I know that there are different types of grants. We have worked on the authorization code, client credentials, and ROPC grant. There are two types of tokens, like the JWT token and internally managed reference tokens. JWT tokens are useful for finding information related to the claim requests. Internally managed reference tokens are useful for dealing with visual data and information. For the clients to fit the user information, they need to do additional work to fit all the user info into the site, which is to define and validate the token issue and provide the request for VPNs. I worked on the key differences between the authorization code and implicit grant. In the authorization code type, you will have the authorization code issued initially to the client, and the client has to exchange it with the authorization server, like using a DAC channel to get the access token. In implicit grants, tokens are issued right away if the application is a single-page application. We can either use the authorization code or an implicit grant.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provides a service that allows users to sign in to whatever application they are using. This is the most important feature of this solution."
"It has benefited my organization in the way that it makes it more secure by making it harder to hack."
"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."
"What I like best about PingID is that it's very user-friendly. PingID is well-built as a developer tool and regularly upgrades and updates via patches. I also like that PingID has clear documents that will help you integrate it with other solutions."
"It offers robust features and customization options that justify the cost."
"It gets a mobility portal in place in conjunction with Office 365. It provides very good possibilities and it's much better than other technology that we have used before which was unstable and slower."
"We use the product to run different reports."
"The soundness of the solution is its most valuable feature. For example, if you are in our corporate network, you can log on without any traffic interfering."
"It is a scalable solution...It is a stable solution."
"It's pretty stable as a product."
 

Cons

"I would like for them to make this solution compatible with Mac OS. I would also like for them to provide a portal so that users can easily integrate it with their applications."
"They should have a landing page."
"The product is not customizable."
"We can choose a drop-down to search for which certificate we have to create, which is difficult."
"In Ping Identity, we have had some issues. We've worked with logging and troubleshooting, including some firewall and security issues."
"We had issues with the stability."
"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"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."
"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."
"PingAccess can only have one token provider, and you cannot enable two different token providers simultaneously."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"At the moment, I believe the price is reasonable."
"The price is reasonable, it's an affordable solution."
"PingID pricing is a ten out of ten because it's a little bit cheaper than other tools, such as Okta and ForgeRock, and supports multiple tools."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"The product is costly."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"The tool is quite affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
43%
Healthcare Company
19%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about PingID?
The mobile biometric authentication option improved user experience. It's always about security because, with two-factor authentication, it's always a separate device verifying the actual user logg...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingID?
The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap.
What needs improvement with PingID?
The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it.
 

Also Known As

OneSign, Imprivata OneSign Authentication Management
Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AZ Groeninge, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool Womens NHS Foundation Trust, Mahaska Health Partnership, Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital, Boulder Community Hospital, City of Marietta, Spencer Hospital, Southwest Washington Medical Center, South Shore Hospital
Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Find out what your peers are saying about Imprivata OneSign vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.