Keycloak vs RSA SecurID: What are the differences?
Introduction:
In this document, we will discuss the key differences between Keycloak and RSA SecurID. Both Keycloak and RSA SecurID are widely used for authentication and access management in IT systems.
-
Integration Level: Keycloak provides seamless integration with commonly used web and mobile platforms. It offers out-of-the-box connectors and adapters, allowing developers to quickly implement authentication and authorization mechanisms in their applications. On the other hand, RSA SecurID requires additional integration efforts, as it usually operates as a separate server in the authentication flow, often requiring custom development and configuration.
-
Authentication Methods: Keycloak supports a wide range of authentication methods, including username/password, social logins, and multi-factor authentication (MFA) options such as one-time passwords (OTP), biometric authentication, and hardware tokens. RSA SecurID, however, primarily relies on its proprietary two-factor authentication (2FA) mechanism, which involves the use of hardware tokens generating time-based one-time passwords.
-
Open-source vs Proprietary: Keycloak is an open-source identity management and access control solution, providing the advantage of an active community, frequent updates, and the ability to customize or extend the software as per specific requirements. In contrast, RSA SecurID is a proprietary authentication solution developed by RSA Security, which limits the flexibility and customization options available to users.
-
Pricing and Licensing: Keycloak is released under the Apache License 2.0, which enables free usage, modification, and distribution of the software without any licensing fees. RSA SecurID, however, is a commercial product with licensing fees, which can vary depending on the number of users and required features.
-
Scalability and Performance: Keycloak is designed to be highly scalable, allowing it to handle a large number of users and requests in a distributed environment. Its architecture supports horizontal scaling, enabling the deployment of multiple instances to distribute the load. RSA SecurID also offers scalability but may require additional hardware resources or infrastructure setup for high-demand scenarios.
-
Ecosystem and Integration Support: Keycloak has a vibrant ecosystem with a wide range of plugins, extensions, and documentation available. It integrates well with popular open-source frameworks like Spring, Java EE, and Angular, making it easier for developers to incorporate authentication and authorization features into their applications. RSA SecurID, on the other hand, is primarily focused on providing authentication services and may have limited integration options with modern frameworks or technologies.
In summary, Keycloak offers seamless integration, supports a variety of authentication methods, is open-source, has flexible licensing options, provides high scalability and performance, and has a rich ecosystem of plugins and extensions. RSA SecurID, on the other hand, may require additional integration efforts, primarily relies on its proprietary 2FA mechanism, is a proprietary product with licensing fees, may have limited integration options, and requires additional setup for high-demand scenarios.
