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

Ping Identity Platform vs Symantec Siteminder comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 12, 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

Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
3rd
Ranking in Access Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (5th), Data Governance (9th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
Symantec Siteminder
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
12th
Ranking in Access Management
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
73
Ranking in other categories
Web Access Management (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Siva Chalamarla - PeerSpot reviewer
Good access control and SSO but needs modernization
The access control and the SSO are the two most valuable features. Siteminder allows users to authenticate once and gain access to multiple applications without needing to reauthenticate for each application separately. For example, if you access one application in one tab, you do not need to provide it again if you are trying to access the same application. The portal has different applications built into it. It's similar to Google. If you open Google and try to access the maps in that Google, you do not need to authenticate in maps. You just need to authenticate in the starting phase. Only a particular group of people have access. Our guys will give an error called access denied or unauthorized access. It depends on the application. It is pretty easy to learn.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's convenient for users to log in through Ping using the Kerberos adapter because it doesn't require them to authenticate again."
"The solution is stable. We haven't experienced any bugs or glitches."
"I find the auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications."
"PingFederate is very flexible. We can do many customizations, and it also provides an SDK to tailor it to our specific requirements. There are also numerous plugins available. I've worked with tools like ForgeRock and Okta, but I find PingFederate to be the most customizable."
"The only feature we were looking for in PingID was SSO integration with our existing web app."
"PingFederate gives you granular control over the settings. There are many options for fine-tuning policies."
"It offers robust features and customization options that justify the cost."
"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 pretty easy to learn."
"The Directory is secure. It's our user store, and it's important to keep our members safe. The product does well with that."
"Ease of use is very good, for administrating it. It's very well known."
"IWA is an out-of-the-box feature. The SAML-based federation is standard for all tools. However, CA Single Sign-On has made the federation configuration way too simple and handy to set up and use."
"Federation is valuable, for sure, because we have a lot of third-party vendors that we need to integrate with, and this is a turnkey solution in some ways."
"It has the ability to authenticate and authorize users. It is the main feature for our security."
"You can quickly deploy the entire product with a basic config within couple of hours."
"Symantec Siteminder Is both scalable and stable."
 

Cons

"PingAccess can only have one token provider, and you cannot enable two different token providers simultaneously."
"The product is not customizable."
"Notifications and monitoring are two areas with shortcomings in the solution that need improvement."
"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."
"Ping Identity Platform must improve its UI since its management console is complicated."
"Sometimes, there are issues with its stability."
"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"It has a long way to go until it is a cloud-based solution."
"The main thing is we do not have the traceability and good monitoring that CA can provide us to capture problems when they occur."
"CA has reporting at the moment. With the reporting, every particular segmented product has a reporting engine. I would like to see centralized reporting for all of them together."
"Better documentation. I went through some sessions on single sign-on for version 12.7."
"The support team could work on their response time and overall competence."
"We would like to the OAuth be more stable, more issues being fixed rather than not."
"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."
"The GUIs are not very clear, especially when integrating with other products from CA."
"The support could be faster."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive 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."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"The product is costly."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"CA solutions are generally expensive but for the customer the ROI is big."
"The price is quite comparable to the other enterprise-level solutions in that market."
"Symantec Siteminder is expensive; they could definitely do better on the price."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The solution's pricing is competitive."
"The licensing is fair for this solution."
"Siteminder is a little costly. You pay for licensing, and they offer packages, so if you have less users, then you have to buy different products at different prices. If you have more of a user base, then the package is different. They also include other features—for example, if you have a database and you're using Siteminder, then it's good to use a Semantic-specific database, but if you are using less, then you have to purchase the database separately. Whereas if you are going for a bigger license, then it comes within the package. It depends on which plan you are using."
"I recommend conducting a PoC on every available product before choose one."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
831,615 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
35%
Insurance Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What do you like most about Symantec Siteminder?
It's agent-based. It's convenient to deploy and integrate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Siteminder?
The maintenance fee has increased, raising concerns about the overall cost to customers.
What needs improvement with Symantec Siteminder?
The maintenance cost has increased significantly, and we are concerned about this. We also need to consider the customization or development required for web authentication when using Active Direct...
 

Also Known As

Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
Single Sign-On, SiteMinder, CA SSO, Layer7 SiteMinder
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
British Telecom, CoreBlox, DBS, HMS, Itera ASA and Simeo
Find out what your peers are saying about Ping Identity Platform vs. Symantec Siteminder and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,615 professionals have used our research since 2012.