Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Keycloak vs ORY Hydra: What are the differences?
Key Differences between Keycloak and ORY Hydra
- Authentication and Authorization: Keycloak provides a comprehensive identity and access management solution, including authentication, authorization, and user management, while ORY Hydra specifically focuses on OAuth2 and OpenID Connect authorization. Keycloak offers a user-friendly interface for managing the complete lifecycle of users and their permissions, whereas ORY Hydra is more lightweight and designed to be integrated into existing systems.
- Modularity and Extensibility: Keycloak is a monolithic solution that offers a wide range of features out-of-the-box, such as social login, single sign-on, and multi-factor authentication. On the other hand, ORY Hydra follows a modular approach, allowing developers to choose and integrate only the specific components they require, making it more lightweight and flexible.
- Community and Support: Keycloak, backed by Red Hat, has a larger and more established community with extensive documentation and active user forums. This ensures better support and a wider range of available resources. ORY Hydra, although less popular, benefits from a rapidly growing community and provides help through their official documentation and GitHub repository.
- Ease of Integration: Keycloak offers seamless integration with other Red Hat products, such as JBoss, and is optimized for Java-based applications. ORY Hydra, being language-agnostic, can be integrated into applications regardless of the programming language used. It provides APIs and SDKs in multiple programming languages, simplifying the integration process.
- Scalability and Performance: Keycloak has been proven to handle large-scale deployments, making it suitable for enterprise-level applications. It provides features like clustering and load balancing for better performance and scalability. ORY Hydra, being more lightweight and modular, is also scalable but is typically used in scenarios that require less complexity and have lower resource demands.
- Ecosystem and Integrations: Keycloak provides extensive integrations with various third-party services and protocols, making it easier to integrate with existing systems. It supports popular social login providers, like Google and Facebook, and protocols such as SAML and LDAP. ORY Hydra, on the other hand, has fewer integrations available but focuses solely on OAuth2 and OpenID Connect, making it a suitable choice for scenarios where these protocols are the main focus.
In Summary, Keycloak offers a comprehensive identity and access management solution with a user-friendly interface, extensive integrations, and strong community support. ORY Hydra, on the other hand, specializes in OAuth2 and OpenID Connect authorization, providing a modular and flexible solution suitable for specific use cases with its language-agnostic approach.
I am working on building a platform in my company that will provide a single sign on to all of the internal products to the customer. To do that we need to build an Authorisation server to comply with the OIDC protocol. Earlier we had built the Auth server using the Spring Security OAuth project but since in Spring Security 5.x it is no longer supported we are planning to get over with it as well. Below are the 2 options that I was considering to replace the Spring Auth Server. 1. Keycloak 2. Okta 3. Auth0 Please advise which one to use.
It isn't clear if beside the AuthZ requirement you had others, but given the scenario you described my suggestion would for you to go with Keycloak. First of all because you have already an onpremise IdP and with Keycloak you could maintain that setup (if privacy is a concern). Another important point is configuration and customization: I would assume with Spring OAuth you might have had some custom logic around authentication, this can be easily reconfigured in Keycloak by leveraging SPI (https://www.keycloak.org/docs/latest/server_development/index.html#_auth_spi). Finally AuthZ as a functionality is well developed, based on standard protocols and extensible on Keycloak (https://www.keycloak.org/docs/latest/authorization_services/)
You can also use Keycloak as an Identity Broker, which enables you to handle authentication on many different identity providers of your customers. With this setup, you are able to perform authorization tasks centralized.
We have good experience using Keycloak for SSO with OIDC with our Spring Boot based applications. It's free, easy to install and configure, extensible - so I recommend it.
Pros of Keycloak
- It's a open source solution33
- Supports multiple identity provider24
- OpenID and SAML support17
- Easy customisation12
- JSON web token10
- Maintained by devs at Redhat6
Pros of ORY Hydra
- Open-source4
- Fully customizable2
- Scalable2
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Keycloak
- Okta7
- Poor client side documentation6
- Lack of Code examples for client side5
