My main use case for Transmit Security is access management and identity journey coordination.

A specific example of how I use Transmit Security for access management and identity journey coordination is that I can use it to log in end users. I appreciate the biometrics login, the security questions, the one-time password, and the FIDO underpinning the authentication.

My team and I also use it to call other APIs. It has a very useful REST client interface.

The best features Transmit Security offers in my experience are that you can coordinate the journeys from the back end, so you do not need to recompile your client in order to roll out new features.

Coordinating journeys from the back end helps my team and organization because you do not need to release a new version of the client, which if it is a mobile app, you have to go through the App Store and the Google Store.

The features are straightforward to use and they use the latest underlying mobile SDKs, so we are confident using them.

Transmit Security has impacted my organization positively because it is reassuring to know that we are building on top of a trusted tool, and we do not rely on developers that could make mistakes, and because it is an authentication platform, that could be detrimental.

I think Transmit Security can be improved by creating features that would allow the replacing of other companies such as Onfido. For example, if it would allow you to sign in by taking a selfie and uploading a picture of your passport.

I have been using Transmit Security for seven years.

Transmit Security is stable.

Transmit Security's scalability is easy to scale.

The customer support varies, but overall, we are satisfied.

I did not previously use a different solution before Transmit Security; it was an in-house solution.

I have not seen a return on investment, as that is not really my area; I am more of an engineer.

Before choosing Transmit Security, we evaluated most of the Gartner Magic Quadrant vendors.

My advice to others looking into using Transmit Security is that they should use it, but they should not try to customize it too much to make the most out of the product.

Because we have had Transmit Security for seven years, it is difficult to remember metrics from before that time.

I rate Transmit Security an eight out of ten, which is a solid mark but leaves some room for improvement, as all tools do.

My main use case for Transmit Security involves user application workflows.

I use Transmit Security for user application workflows by developing the login for the app for users.

One of the biggest challenges I face using Transmit Security for login is that sometimes I need to use the SDK provided with the front end because I have to work closely with the front end team.

I do not have anything else to add about my main use case with Transmit Security, and I do not have something unique about how my organization uses it.

The best features Transmit Security offers are the block programming feature, an AuthScript-based programming language, and the graphic view.

The block programming and graphic view in Transmit Security help me in my daily work because it is easier to generate the workflows for the user. However, when the workflows are a little bit more complex, I have different ramifications, so I have to keep my code simple and ready to use.

Transmit Security has positively impacted my organization by improving the development of workflows in order to help the user experience.

It has improved the user experience as it is sometimes easier for me to program or I have a quicker response time than normal programming teams because it is block-based.

I wish Transmit Security had a better scrolling pinpoint feature because sometimes when I scroll through the tree, I can mess up the programming, especially if the elements are inside of a block.

Besides the scrolling and pinpointing issues, I think Transmit Security can be improved regarding AuthScript, which is really designed only for Transmit Security and has a lot of potential in loops for looping through arrays or searching through arrays or when I have containers. I only have two methods to search through arrays, which are really confusing and sometimes not the best for the performance of the code.

Regarding the needed improvements, I think the documentation is provided alongside the new updates, but it would help if there was a function that allows looping because it does not have a for or while loop and it is really confusing sometimes.

I have been using Transmit Security for five years.

Transmit Security is stable in my experience.

The scalability of Transmit Security is a little bit tricky. It is not easy to scale and depends on the complexity of my workflows and how many users I am going to support.

The customer support for Transmit Security is okay.

Before Transmit Security, I did not use a different solution. We were using the common backends with nothing fancy, just the basic architecture.

I think we need a small team to operate Transmit Security, so that is fine.

I have heard that pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Transmit Security are a little bit expensive, but I am not in charge of the budget in my team, so I cannot answer that with complete certainty, although I know that the licensing is costly.

My advice to others looking into using Transmit Security is that they have to be able to understand the product first, read through all the documentation, and remember that it is a tool. When developing your best coding practices within your organization, you have to be very clear and work alongside the customer support to make your code as performant as possible.

At the end, Transmit Security is a good tool. Sometimes very difficult things are solved easily using it, but some things that should be easy have a little bit of complexity with using AuthScript of Transmit Security. You have to have a full understanding before implementing this tool, and I think that is really important. I gave this review a rating of seven.

We use Transmit products in our data center and have been an ELA customer.

It offer IAM products for the industry. Technically, their products are very good – especially in terms of customization and security – compared to solutions like SharePoint and Omada. However, as an end customer, pricing is a concern.

The whole IAM products are strong in terms of technical aspects, implementation, and deployment. The access management features are highly rated and enhance security.

From an end customer's perspective, this is very helpful. The main area for improvement is making their pricing more competitive. Their pricing might be higher because of the quality of their product, but it still needs to align better with the market.

I like Transmit FlexID, which is more focused on user-based identity.

Transmit interface is flexible and user-friendly, which is important for our workload. Switching from one authentication code to multiple exposure or two-factor authentication (MFA) is seamless. Transmit provides security and addresses sensitive administrative work on both technical ends. Their authentication suite helps us secure our infrastructure. Overall, I'd rate Transmit highly in security.

Pricing is an area where Transmit Security could improve. The pricing needs to be more competitive.

I have been using it for three years.

It's very stable. The Android applications are the backbone of this product line, supporting user authentication and two-factor methods.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

It offers good scalability. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

We have a significant number of Transmit users in our organization. We use it daily.

The customer service and support are very supportive. They have responsive in-house teams available across different regions.

Since we're an ELA customer, we get high-end, 24/7 online support and ticketing.

We find them proactive and communicative, especially regarding deployments, patch management, and software development, to avoid service interruptions.

It is very easy to setup. In terms of technology perspective, platform perspective, and user perspective, it offers good usability.

It is easy to deploy, run and manage. The implementation was seamless. It's an independent product, so there aren't dependencies during setup. Authentication-wise, it offers multiple options for customers to choose from, which enhances security.

We deployed it. There is always complexity in the deployment process because it is a security product. But there are no dependencies from Transmit side; it depends entirely on the user's infrastructure. It can be deployed anywhere.

It offers a direct deployment. The product itself is very flexible. Deploying the solution is seamless, and it offers an open-ended platform that supports various infrastructure levels and applications.

The product itself is good, and the technical support is strong. However, I'd rate pricing around a seven out of ten, with one being cheap and ten being expensive. There's room for improvement.

Considering the security features offered, the pricing makes sense, but could be optimized.

I worked with FlexID, a Transmit product. I evaluated different products like Symantec, Omada, and TrendPoint systems helpful – especially the price comparisons and detailed technical product descriptions.

I also looked into Microsoft and other vendors.

I would definitely recommend using this solution. It's a good product with a strong presence in the market. The focus should be on aligning pricing with customer volume and the scale of business they bring in.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. It excels in security, offers a seamless authentication process, and handles even complex projects well. Strong technical support, regular updates, and clear communication with clients are additional positives.