I am using Auth0 Platform while developing our application for securing it. We are using Auth0 Platform for multi-tenancy work, creating users, and generating tokens. I am using it for authentication and authorization for my web application.

All microservices we are deploying on the cloud use GitHub to store all repositories and Azure to deploy. We create Docker containers and push our microservices code and images there. All of those things are connected with Auth0 Platform and work very well. There are no issues with Auth0 Platform, Docker, or microservices, and all integrations are working fine.

We are not doing agent-based applications yet, but it is in our application's next scope. In a couple of months, we will integrate and develop the feature to use Auth0 Platform with an AI agent.

Our application serves the retail segment with inventory management. We are selling different items on platforms such as Amazon, eBay, and other marketplaces at the enterprise level.

There are many features in Auth0 Platform. Sometimes when we consider other tools instead of Auth0 Platform, we cannot get everything in one place. In Auth0 Platform, if I want to do authentication and authorization using Google or single sign-on or Okta or different providers, I can do that there. I can customize my login page, and there are built-in features. I just need to use the default feature that is free, but for customization based on my needs, I need to pay. For default features, many platforms do not provide even the default feature, but Auth0 Platform has free features. I can maintain different connections to utilize multi-tenancy in my application, where different organizations are connected with different connections and all users are stored in that particular connection database only. Auth0 Platform even provides the opportunity to connect with my local database and store all user details there. Many features are available in Auth0 Platform, and I am utilizing all the features available.

Earlier, I was also doing authorization and authentication, but I had to write a lot of code such as writing classes, generating tokens, and saving details. I also needed to create APIs to manage these things. However, with Auth0 Platform, different management APIs are already available. I need to generate a token and call those APIs. All of those things are handled from Auth0 Platform's side. I am just calling a certain API, which saves a lot of time from the development perspective while providing many features. This allows me to secure my application more efficiently. These are the benefits I am getting from Auth0 Platform.

I previously used Google provider and Okta separately, but I find everything with Auth0 Platform in one place. Key differences include time-saving features, everything in one place, many features, support for multi-tenancy, and management APIs for easy integration. All of these are advantages, and I have not experienced any disadvantages.

There have been many improvements in our cloud technology since we are using Auth0 Platform. It is helping a lot. The main thing is that it reduces our development time while providing many features to integrate and utilize. We do not have to include dependencies from multiple providers. Everything is available in one place with Auth0 Platform. We are utilizing it to develop our application faster, which minimizes our time and maximizes utilization.

I noticed some enhancement challenges. Sometimes when I logged in, there was a thirty-day time period to log in again, but recently after restarting my system, that thirty-day period is not working. I need to provide the token after login again, which is for the security part. For development accounts used by others, every time we need to use those tokens to connect to that site. UI improvements can also be made, particularly on the homepage, where tiles could be displayed. It would help if there were separate left bar tiles for the login section so anyone could edit their login page directly.

Everything is working very well. However, when integrating, I need to give permissions and manage many things manually when creating users with multi-tenancy. For instance, I first create the connection, then the organization, enable the connection at the application level, allow some permissions, and create the default user. Improvements could be made so that when someone creates an organization, a default user is available from Auth0 Platform to log in, and they could use those credentials to create further users. This is also dependent on functionality and user requirements. For my use case, that was lacking.

The initial setup was somewhat complex. Since I was doing it for the first time, I needed to create an application, allow permissions, integrate it, and set redirect variables and URLs for logout. Although documentation is available, it does not specify the exact format for multiple logout URLs or multi-tenant URLs. Sometimes I had to try different methods until it worked. Improvements in documentation are needed for first-time setups.

When connecting with Auth0 Platform, if there is a failure or error, I do not receive a specific message to identify if it is a bug or another type of issue. I suggest having clearer error messages, such as indicating what is missing or providing expected formatting for values.

I have been working with Auth0 Platform for the last one year.

When connecting with Auth0 Platform, if there is a failure or error, I do not receive a specific message to identify if it is a bug or another type of issue. I suggest having clearer error messages, such as indicating what is missing or providing expected formatting for values.

I previously used Google provider and Okta separately, but I find everything with Auth0 Platform in one place.

The initial setup was somewhat complex. Since I was doing it for the first time, I needed to create an application, allow permissions, integrate it, and set redirect variables and URLs for logout. Although documentation is available, it does not specify the exact format for multiple logout URLs or multi-tenant URLs. Sometimes I had to try different methods until it worked. Improvements in documentation are needed for first-time setups.

I did the initial setup and integration by myself without any integrators or consultants.

The pricing is good for now because I am using the developer account. I will evaluate the production account next week to see what features I need and check the pricing based on that. For now, I am utilizing mainly default features, but I customized the login page, which incurs some pricing. However, it is manageable.

I evaluated a couple of options, but I chose Auth0 Platform because it looks very good to me.

Everything is good for me now, and I have no additional recommendations. I would rate this review ten out of ten.

I use Auth0 Platform as our authentication platform to allow our customers into the app that we provide, so it's essentially our authentication piece.

The ability to manage multiple customers and assign roles within Auth0 Platform is the most valuable feature I have found. It allows certain users access only to specific pages or data sets in our application. We can have all our customers in different buckets. I also maintain separate production and staging environments with distinct setups, making it central for authentication management across different environments and customers.

The flexibility of Auth0 Platform's customizable authentication flows in adapting to our organization's specific needs is commendable. Being able to execute custom code snippets within Auth0 Platform to set different access levels or provide messages to users who lack access to requested pages, along with tracking and notifications, is very beneficial.

The impact of Auth0 Platform's centralized, customizable universal login on our organization's user experience is significant, as it is essential for hosting our application effectively.

The reporting in Auth0 Platform could use improvement. Currently, most of the reporting is contained within Auth0 Platform, but it would be useful to have notification streams sent to email or Teams. Enhancing notification features and their ease of use would be beneficial.

I do not have any specific recommendations for improvements as I utilize features I need, such as actions and triggers, as needed. Much in Auth0 Platform remains unutilized by us due to lack of needs, highlighting scalability.

I am not using Bot Detection and Attack Protection enhancements actively; it might be part of Auth0 Platform that I am not familiar with. Additionally, I lack enhanced B2B features implementation, focusing instead on applications and user management.

I have been working with Auth0 Platform for approximately seven or eight years.

I have not often communicated with the technical support specialists at Auth0 Platform. I remember maybe once or twice experiencing outages that seemed global. During those instances, I waited for service restoration without contacting support.

Auth0 Platform scales exceptionally well with us. I find the built-in Zanzibar and Spide authorization engine robust. As I continuously add users, customers, and refactor for other applications in Auth0 Platform, it supports my application growth efficiently.

I would rate the scalability level of Auth0 Platform as a 10. Scalability is crucial for us, with business directives requiring flexible and manageable platforms such as Auth0 Platform. Its intuitive interface supports seamless build-outs as needed without problems.

I have not often communicated with the technical support specialists of Auth0 Platform, except possibly during rare outages. Otherwise, I have not needed to engage with tech support.

I used a different solution for similar use cases before Auth0 Platform, through Microsoft. It was contained in Microsoft Azure's federation service, though the exact name escapes me as it has been a long time.

I switched to Auth0 Platform as part of migrating from Azure to Google Cloud seven years ago, driven by dissatisfaction with Microsoft Azure due to billing issues. My move to the Google stack included incorporating Auth0 Platform.

I considered options such as Okta at one point, but Auth0 Platform was a better fit.

From what I remember, the initial setup process with Auth0 Platform was straightforward. I had guides and consultants familiar with Auth0 Platform who provided a white-glove service, aiding my team in establishing connections and setting up my application. The scalability since then has been admirable.

I participated in the initial setup and deployment of Auth0 Platform.

I feel it has been a very prudent investment. I get everything I want and more from it for what I invest.

Currently, I feel that Auth0 Platform is very affordable.

In my Confluence environment, I have instructions for setting up new applications, adding, and managing users, so I maintain my custom documentation for Auth0 Platform.

I think it is somewhat difficult to suggest enhancements for Auth0 Platform as I choose features based on necessity and have always found needful accommodations when required.

We use Auth0 Platform for our clients, and we started in 2019, which means we have been using it for around four years.

Auth0 Platform is used for user authentication. We use it for our clients who are using Google authentication. We have integrated with Azure Connect for another client from outside. Basically, we use Auth0 Platform for authentication.

Regarding the flexibility of customizable authentication, we do not have a specific need because we only authenticate, and the endpoint sends the verification, which is really easy. We have even tried SAML connection because another client suggested that there should be more clients with SAML connection.

The impact of Auth0 Platform's centralized, customizable universal login on the user experience is significant because we have to adapt to the client's email since most clients are from Google with a Google IDP. In that case, we use the universal login to separate them and cooperate with that.

We do not utilize the Fine Grained Authorization feature as we only use it for authentication. For authorizations, we use our internal system.

The best features of Auth0 Platform are that it is easy to integrate and is cross-platform. We use it with the Angular front end and the UWP application, and it also works with the iOS application, so it is really easy to integrate within the dashboard without any complications.

Regarding the flexibility of customizable authentication, we do not have a specific need because we only authenticate, and the endpoint sends the verification, which is really easy. We have even tried SAML connection because another client suggested that there should be more clients with SAML connection.

Auth0 Platform could improve by allowing more than three enterprise connections, as I remember it being three. We are stuck with that because I am not sure how the plan works, but it should be at least five.

The areas for improvement in Auth0 Platform include the UWP functionality, which works fine with the SDK. The support is also good as we read the documents available. In comparison to Keycloak, Auth0 Platform is my ultimate choice due to the ease of integration and strong support when we raise a ticket.

The amount of enterprise accounts could be improved, as that is my concern.

We use Auth0 Platform for our clients, and we started in 2019, which means we have been using it for around four years.

The reason I rate scalability a seven is not due to downtime, bugs, or glitches, as we have not experienced any. My concern is more about scaling connection-wise. For the last four years, we have not experienced any bugs from Auth0 Platform.

When assessing scalability, I would rate it around a seven, but the plans raise some concerns for me.

Auth0 Platform is scalable, and I would rate it around ten for being able to downsize or upsize based on our requirements.

Auth0 Platform requires maintenance as we have done some updates, and recently we have not done anything. However, we are in touch with Auth0 Platform team for any required security updates.

Maintenance is easy because we can handle everything using their Auth0 Platform configuration site.

I would rate the technical support of Auth0 Platform around nine, as it is one of the perfect supports I have had.

I have been using Keycloak for around two years, and we worked with it for around one year for that project. Now we are not working at the moment, but for the support, we are working on that.

Regarding the use case, we do not use Okta platform; we use Keycloak instead. Okta and Keycloak are two different things.

When comparing Auth0 Platform to other solutions and vendors on the market, it stands out for being easy in terms of integration, which is the main thing as a developer. It supports all the libraries, and when going to Angular, there are NPM packages and the SDK available. In comparison to Keycloak being a free open-source option, I prefer Auth0 Platform.

The pricing of Auth0 Platform is a consideration when choosing the technology. While comparing Auth0 Platform and Keycloak, I note that they are two different things—one is free and the other is paid. Therefore, we cannot directly compare a free option to a paid one, but I prefer Auth0 Platform's pricing.

For others looking to implement Auth0 Platform, I recommend that it is very easy to integrate, and they offer free plans to support everything. While pricing might be slightly higher than other options, the support and documentation provided are perfect. The only concern remains the plans, as small organizations like us just need around four to five connections.

I would estimate that the return on investment with Auth0 Platform saves around thirty to forty percent of my time in comparison to integrating with Keycloak.

I work with Okta, and I also work with SailPoint, Veza, and IBM tools because I am overseeing many sales engagements, and I must deal with many tools. We are a service company, and we offer different kinds of products to our clients.

For example, there is an enterprise customer XYZ Corporation using Microsoft Azure AD as an IDP, who logs into a multi-tenant HR application through an Auth0 tenant managing connections, RBAC, and tokens. The user visits the HR application and logs in with their email, Auth0 redirects them to Azure AD for authentication, which sends tokens back to Auth0, allowing the user to access the HR app with the roles assigned.

Working on Veza at this stage includes preparation for migrating systems; I will begin this process in the coming months after thorough research and planning.

Auth0 Platform from Okta, which is for access management and single sign-on, is basically for dividing modern IM into categories. The first is workforce identity, meaning SSO and access management solutions for users, partners, and temporary employees, which is catered by a traditional Okta Platform. Customer identity speaks about internet application customers, such as logging into an FMCG application through mobile or laptop applications like Flipkart, Amazon, and Alibaba.com. If security is needed for these applications, it is called customer identity and access management solution, CIAM, and requires a different tool because the user base will be in millions or billions. For instance, banking apps and airline applications fall under CIAM solutions, and Auth0 Platform will be implemented for these requirements.

Most integrations will not be done by traditional connectors but by exchanging metadata between the application and Auth0 Platform. Once metadata is exchanged, certificate information and cryptographic keys are also exchanged, making transactions secure. Different methodologies for onboarding users are available, including bulk onboarding and risk score features. If someone logs into a banking app normally from the UK, but they log in from Namibia after stealing a mobile phone, the application detects this change of location as a zero trust model. Policies such as restricting app access based on location can also be implemented using Auth0 Platform, along with self-service user registration features similar to opening a bank account.

Universal login, while I do not think it has a major impact, allows a seamless experience by authenticating multiple app logins from one entry point, which would be particularly useful in healthcare applications.

Auth0 Platform is quite affordable compared to IBM Security Access Verify, which is on the higher end. ForgeRock and Okta are in the same bucket for pricing.

Auth0 Platform is not as flexible compared to ForgeRock or IBM Security Access Manager.

Auth0 Platform will only play on the outer boundary of the application. Once the application team requests to handle their entire system and APIs, then only ForgeRock and IBM Security Access Manager can help; Auth0 Platform cannot assist.

The only area for improvement is that Auth0 Platform cannot handle requests for developing APIs for legacy systems, such as mainframe models, where ForgeRock and IBM Security Verify Access can be utilized.

I have been dealing with Auth0 Platform for more than one year.

I have not experienced any downtime with Okta; in the last one and a half years, including production environments with higher availability setups, the systems ensure uptime.

Auth0 Platform is very scalable, and Okta handles CI/CD deployments effectively to adjust to needs.

Using enhanced features improves multi-tenant management for B2B SaaS.

Customer support from Okta is quite good; I know people personally, and their learning portal is also effective. They need to hire more resources, though, especially as they expand products. Okta is capable of being competitive but is limited due to resource constraints.

I would rate their customer support a nine; I have not seen any complaints.

I have been working recently with Veza through a client looking to replace SailPoint. Veza, acquired by ServiceNow, offers an IM solution at a lower cost by bundling it with the ServiceNow license.

Auth0 Platform is SaaS based. They spin up a tenant for me upon deal closure, and I can access it immediately, establishing different roles for administrative and user purposes to start implementation without delay.

I can enable attack protection in Auth0 Platform, which protects applications from automated attacks such as brute force, credential stuffing, and password spraying by analyzing various detection signals including IP reputation and suspicious login velocity. If a risk is detected, Auth0 Platform can trigger mitigation actions such as blocking requests, initiating captcha challenges, throttling login attempts, and sending logs to SIEM systems.

Regarding ROI with Auth0 Platform, they offer various subscription plans including free basic options for a few hundred users, but comprehensive ROI reflects better with the full Okta platform, which is robust in providing a unified security solution. Okta is unique in offering comprehensive services including single sign-on, IGA, privileged access, and endpoint security, making it a worthwhile investment compared to deploying multiple vendors.

Auth0 Platform is quite affordable compared to IBM Security Access Verify, which is on the higher end. ForgeRock and Okta are in the same bucket for pricing.

Veza's entire SDK is built on Python, which enhances integration capabilities with AI tools and chatbots. As the market shifts toward cost-effective solutions, especially in expectation of an economic slump, Veza is positioned to gain traction.

Auth0 Platform will only play on the outer boundary of the application. Once the application team requests to handle their entire system and APIs, then only ForgeRock and IBM Security Access Manager can help. Auth0 Platform cannot assist, making Auth0 Platform slightly better in terms of user migration.

Detecting automated traffic is vital for security measures, as it provides end-to-end security. It protects login and signup endpoints and deals with attacks through various implementations, including breach detection.