Thought Leadership

OIDC vs. SAML: Understanding the Differences and Upgrading to Modern Authentication

Written By
Harry Guo
Published On
Jan 13, 2025

When adding authentication to your application, choosing the right authentication standard is critical for ensuring secure and seamless user experiences. Two of the most widely used protocols in identity management are Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) and OpenID Connect (OIDC). While both serve the same fundamental purpose—enabling single sign-on (SSO) and user authentication—their architectures, use cases, and strengths differ significantly. There’s a whole lot to unpack about both standards (see the hefty SAML core spec and OIDC spec) but this guide will give you a brief overview.

If your organization is considering adding authentication to your product, this guide will help you determine what is right for you (hint: it’s OIDC!). Or, if your organization is considering upgrading from SAML to OIDC, we will help you understand the differences and navigate the migration process.

What is SAML?

SAML (SAML 2.0 since 2005), or Security Assertion Markup Language, is an XML-based authentication protocol designed primarily for web-based applications. It enables single sign-on (SSO) by allowing users to authenticate once and access multiple applications without needing to log in again. 

Key Features of SAML:

  • XML-Based Assertions: Exchanges XML-based assertions about the user’s identity, using the browser as a method of transporting messages between the relying party and identity provider.
  • Broad Adoption: Widely supported in enterprise environments.
  • Certificate-Based Trust: Certificates are exchanged between the identity provider and relying party and used to prove authenticity.

However, SAML is not without limitations. It can be overly complex to implement and maintain, especially as organizations move toward mobile-first and cloud-native architectures. 

For instance, mobile apps often require workarounds to support SAML, such as embedding webviews for login. Certificate rotation in SAML is also often a manual process that requires coordination between the identity provider and relying parties, leading to downtime if not handled properly.

What is OIDC?

OpenID Connect (OIDC) is a modern authentication protocol built on top of OAuth 2.0. It’s designed for secure, lightweight communication between clients (e.g., mobile apps, web apps) and identity providers. OIDC allows relying parties to verify an end user’s identity and obtain basic end-user profile information.

Key Features of OIDC:

  • JSON-Based Tokens: Uses JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) for lightweight and efficient communication.
  • Mobile and API-friendly: Optimized for modern applications and RESTful APIs.
  • Key-Based Trust: Uses JSON Web Keys to sign and validate tokens.

OIDC addresses many of the challenges posed by SAML, making it the preferred choice for cloud and mobile-first organizations.

Why choose OIDC over SAML?


Feature SAML OIDC

Protocol Structure

XML-based, which can grow large and difficult to handle

Lightweight JWTs, requiring minimal processing

Compatibility

Legacy Systems, Web

Modern Web & Mobile Apps
Scalability and Performance SAML has been widely used for the past 20 years Leaner, more flexible, and compatible with more modern technologies

OIDC offers several advantages over SAML, making it the preferred choice for modern applications:

  1. Lightweight and Modern: Built on OAuth 2.0, OIDC uses JSON Web Tokens (JWT) and REST APIs, simplifying integration compared to SAML’s XML-heavy structure.
  2. Mobile-First Design: OIDC is designed for mobile and single-page applications, while SAML is better suited for traditional web apps.
  3. Developer-Friendly: OIDC’s simplicity, robust libraries, and documentation streamline implementation, unlike SAML's steep learning curve.
  4. Dynamic Key Management: OIDC supports seamless key rotation via jwks_uri, whereas SAML requires manual X.509 certificate management.
  5. Broader Ecosystem: OIDC integrates easily with modern APIs, cloud-native systems, and providers like Google and Microsoft.
  6. Token Portability: OIDC’s compact JWTs are versatile and easily shared, while SAML assertions are bulky and less portable.
  7. API-Driven: OIDC excels in API and mobile app use cases, offering greater flexibility than SAML.

My experience working with SAML and OIDC

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of building SAML and OIDC implementations, from both relying party AND identity provider side, and I can tell you that OIDC was 5x easier.

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of implementing both SAML and OIDC protocols from both the identity provider (IdP) and relying party/service provider (SP) perspectives. Through this experience, I’ve come to appreciate the stark differences in complexity and security between the two, and I can confidently say that OIDC is significantly simpler and more secure.

Implementing SAML often felt cumbersome and required extensive configuration. For example, our OIDC configuration only needed a name for the integration and a redirect URI, while SAML required seven mandatory fields and another three or more optional ones, making the setup process confusing and error-prone. Reading through the SAML specifications only added to the complexity. There are over ten auxiliary documents in addition to the core spec, most of which are rarely used in practice. (Have you ever encountered the SAML Artifact Resolution Protocol? Neither have most people.)

My experience integrating SAML with Shibboleth, a protocol built on top of SAML that is widely used by higher education institutions in the U.S., further magnified these challenges. It added more confusing configuration and specifications on top of the already intricate SAML, further increasing the complexity of integration. Shibboleth compounded this challenge by lacking a user interface, instead relying on manually edited and uploaded configuration files.

In contrast, OIDC was refreshingly lightweight and straightforward. Most modern applications support it, and the implementation process was intuitive. The OIDC spec was far easier to digest, with a clear focus on security, explicitly detailing the purpose and security benefits of each parameter. This made it much easier to implement correctly and confidently. Additionally, there are numerous excellent resources and open-source libraries available for OIDC, offering flexibility in how deep or customized your implementation needs to be, whether you're building a simple integration or a more advanced solution.

How to upgrade from SAML to OIDC in 5 simple steps

  1. Assess Your Current Environment: Understand your existing authentication flows, logic, and dependencies. Identify all applications and systems relying on SAML authentication.
  2. Define Requirements: Determine your authentication needs, such as single sign-on (SSO), multi-factor authentication (MFA), or API compatibility, and ensure your chosen OIDC provider supports them.
  3. Set Up OIDC Authentication Alongside SAML: Configure OIDC authentication in parallel to your existing SAML setup. This allows for gradual transition without disrupting user access.
  4. Test OIDC Authentication: Test OIDC thoroughly to ensure users can log in without issues. Validate functionality across all integrated apps and platforms.
  5. Decommission SAML: Once OIDC is fully operational and stable, phase out SAML. Since users won't notice any difference in their login experience, this step can be completed smoothly.

Conclusion

OIDC is the modern choice for authentication, offering simplicity, scalability, and seamless integration for today’s mobile and API-driven world. Upgrading from SAML to OIDC enhances security, improves user experience, and future-proofs your identity strategy.

Get started with Device360 today

OIDC vs. SAML: Understanding the Differences and Upgrading to Modern Authentication

Download

When adding authentication to your application, choosing the right authentication standard is critical for ensuring secure and seamless user experiences. Two of the most widely used protocols in identity management are Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) and OpenID Connect (OIDC). While both serve the same fundamental purpose—enabling single sign-on (SSO) and user authentication—their architectures, use cases, and strengths differ significantly. There’s a whole lot to unpack about both standards (see the hefty SAML core spec and OIDC spec) but this guide will give you a brief overview.

If your organization is considering adding authentication to your product, this guide will help you determine what is right for you (hint: it’s OIDC!). Or, if your organization is considering upgrading from SAML to OIDC, we will help you understand the differences and navigate the migration process.

What is SAML?

SAML (SAML 2.0 since 2005), or Security Assertion Markup Language, is an XML-based authentication protocol designed primarily for web-based applications. It enables single sign-on (SSO) by allowing users to authenticate once and access multiple applications without needing to log in again. 

Key Features of SAML:

  • XML-Based Assertions: Exchanges XML-based assertions about the user’s identity, using the browser as a method of transporting messages between the relying party and identity provider.
  • Broad Adoption: Widely supported in enterprise environments.
  • Certificate-Based Trust: Certificates are exchanged between the identity provider and relying party and used to prove authenticity.

However, SAML is not without limitations. It can be overly complex to implement and maintain, especially as organizations move toward mobile-first and cloud-native architectures. 

For instance, mobile apps often require workarounds to support SAML, such as embedding webviews for login. Certificate rotation in SAML is also often a manual process that requires coordination between the identity provider and relying parties, leading to downtime if not handled properly.

What is OIDC?

OpenID Connect (OIDC) is a modern authentication protocol built on top of OAuth 2.0. It’s designed for secure, lightweight communication between clients (e.g., mobile apps, web apps) and identity providers. OIDC allows relying parties to verify an end user’s identity and obtain basic end-user profile information.

Key Features of OIDC:

  • JSON-Based Tokens: Uses JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) for lightweight and efficient communication.
  • Mobile and API-friendly: Optimized for modern applications and RESTful APIs.
  • Key-Based Trust: Uses JSON Web Keys to sign and validate tokens.

OIDC addresses many of the challenges posed by SAML, making it the preferred choice for cloud and mobile-first organizations.

Why choose OIDC over SAML?


Feature SAML OIDC

Protocol Structure

XML-based, which can grow large and difficult to handle

Lightweight JWTs, requiring minimal processing

Compatibility

Legacy Systems, Web

Modern Web & Mobile Apps
Scalability and Performance SAML has been widely used for the past 20 years Leaner, more flexible, and compatible with more modern technologies

OIDC offers several advantages over SAML, making it the preferred choice for modern applications:

  1. Lightweight and Modern: Built on OAuth 2.0, OIDC uses JSON Web Tokens (JWT) and REST APIs, simplifying integration compared to SAML’s XML-heavy structure.
  2. Mobile-First Design: OIDC is designed for mobile and single-page applications, while SAML is better suited for traditional web apps.
  3. Developer-Friendly: OIDC’s simplicity, robust libraries, and documentation streamline implementation, unlike SAML's steep learning curve.
  4. Dynamic Key Management: OIDC supports seamless key rotation via jwks_uri, whereas SAML requires manual X.509 certificate management.
  5. Broader Ecosystem: OIDC integrates easily with modern APIs, cloud-native systems, and providers like Google and Microsoft.
  6. Token Portability: OIDC’s compact JWTs are versatile and easily shared, while SAML assertions are bulky and less portable.
  7. API-Driven: OIDC excels in API and mobile app use cases, offering greater flexibility than SAML.

My experience working with SAML and OIDC

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of building SAML and OIDC implementations, from both relying party AND identity provider side, and I can tell you that OIDC was 5x easier.

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of implementing both SAML and OIDC protocols from both the identity provider (IdP) and relying party/service provider (SP) perspectives. Through this experience, I’ve come to appreciate the stark differences in complexity and security between the two, and I can confidently say that OIDC is significantly simpler and more secure.

Implementing SAML often felt cumbersome and required extensive configuration. For example, our OIDC configuration only needed a name for the integration and a redirect URI, while SAML required seven mandatory fields and another three or more optional ones, making the setup process confusing and error-prone. Reading through the SAML specifications only added to the complexity. There are over ten auxiliary documents in addition to the core spec, most of which are rarely used in practice. (Have you ever encountered the SAML Artifact Resolution Protocol? Neither have most people.)

My experience integrating SAML with Shibboleth, a protocol built on top of SAML that is widely used by higher education institutions in the U.S., further magnified these challenges. It added more confusing configuration and specifications on top of the already intricate SAML, further increasing the complexity of integration. Shibboleth compounded this challenge by lacking a user interface, instead relying on manually edited and uploaded configuration files.

In contrast, OIDC was refreshingly lightweight and straightforward. Most modern applications support it, and the implementation process was intuitive. The OIDC spec was far easier to digest, with a clear focus on security, explicitly detailing the purpose and security benefits of each parameter. This made it much easier to implement correctly and confidently. Additionally, there are numerous excellent resources and open-source libraries available for OIDC, offering flexibility in how deep or customized your implementation needs to be, whether you're building a simple integration or a more advanced solution.

How to upgrade from SAML to OIDC in 5 simple steps

  1. Assess Your Current Environment: Understand your existing authentication flows, logic, and dependencies. Identify all applications and systems relying on SAML authentication.
  2. Define Requirements: Determine your authentication needs, such as single sign-on (SSO), multi-factor authentication (MFA), or API compatibility, and ensure your chosen OIDC provider supports them.
  3. Set Up OIDC Authentication Alongside SAML: Configure OIDC authentication in parallel to your existing SAML setup. This allows for gradual transition without disrupting user access.
  4. Test OIDC Authentication: Test OIDC thoroughly to ensure users can log in without issues. Validate functionality across all integrated apps and platforms.
  5. Decommission SAML: Once OIDC is fully operational and stable, phase out SAML. Since users won't notice any difference in their login experience, this step can be completed smoothly.

Conclusion

OIDC is the modern choice for authentication, offering simplicity, scalability, and seamless integration for today’s mobile and API-driven world. Upgrading from SAML to OIDC enhances security, improves user experience, and future-proofs your identity strategy.

OIDC vs. SAML: Understanding the Differences and Upgrading to Modern Authentication

Learn the differences between SAML and OIDC, why OIDC is the modern choice, and how to upgrade your authentication for a secure, seamless user experience.

When adding authentication to your application, choosing the right authentication standard is critical for ensuring secure and seamless user experiences. Two of the most widely used protocols in identity management are Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) and OpenID Connect (OIDC). While both serve the same fundamental purpose—enabling single sign-on (SSO) and user authentication—their architectures, use cases, and strengths differ significantly. There’s a whole lot to unpack about both standards (see the hefty SAML core spec and OIDC spec) but this guide will give you a brief overview.

If your organization is considering adding authentication to your product, this guide will help you determine what is right for you (hint: it’s OIDC!). Or, if your organization is considering upgrading from SAML to OIDC, we will help you understand the differences and navigate the migration process.

What is SAML?

SAML (SAML 2.0 since 2005), or Security Assertion Markup Language, is an XML-based authentication protocol designed primarily for web-based applications. It enables single sign-on (SSO) by allowing users to authenticate once and access multiple applications without needing to log in again. 

Key Features of SAML:

  • XML-Based Assertions: Exchanges XML-based assertions about the user’s identity, using the browser as a method of transporting messages between the relying party and identity provider.
  • Broad Adoption: Widely supported in enterprise environments.
  • Certificate-Based Trust: Certificates are exchanged between the identity provider and relying party and used to prove authenticity.

However, SAML is not without limitations. It can be overly complex to implement and maintain, especially as organizations move toward mobile-first and cloud-native architectures. 

For instance, mobile apps often require workarounds to support SAML, such as embedding webviews for login. Certificate rotation in SAML is also often a manual process that requires coordination between the identity provider and relying parties, leading to downtime if not handled properly.

What is OIDC?

OpenID Connect (OIDC) is a modern authentication protocol built on top of OAuth 2.0. It’s designed for secure, lightweight communication between clients (e.g., mobile apps, web apps) and identity providers. OIDC allows relying parties to verify an end user’s identity and obtain basic end-user profile information.

Key Features of OIDC:

  • JSON-Based Tokens: Uses JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) for lightweight and efficient communication.
  • Mobile and API-friendly: Optimized for modern applications and RESTful APIs.
  • Key-Based Trust: Uses JSON Web Keys to sign and validate tokens.

OIDC addresses many of the challenges posed by SAML, making it the preferred choice for cloud and mobile-first organizations.

Why choose OIDC over SAML?


Feature SAML OIDC

Protocol Structure

XML-based, which can grow large and difficult to handle

Lightweight JWTs, requiring minimal processing

Compatibility

Legacy Systems, Web

Modern Web & Mobile Apps
Scalability and Performance SAML has been widely used for the past 20 years Leaner, more flexible, and compatible with more modern technologies

OIDC offers several advantages over SAML, making it the preferred choice for modern applications:

  1. Lightweight and Modern: Built on OAuth 2.0, OIDC uses JSON Web Tokens (JWT) and REST APIs, simplifying integration compared to SAML’s XML-heavy structure.
  2. Mobile-First Design: OIDC is designed for mobile and single-page applications, while SAML is better suited for traditional web apps.
  3. Developer-Friendly: OIDC’s simplicity, robust libraries, and documentation streamline implementation, unlike SAML's steep learning curve.
  4. Dynamic Key Management: OIDC supports seamless key rotation via jwks_uri, whereas SAML requires manual X.509 certificate management.
  5. Broader Ecosystem: OIDC integrates easily with modern APIs, cloud-native systems, and providers like Google and Microsoft.
  6. Token Portability: OIDC’s compact JWTs are versatile and easily shared, while SAML assertions are bulky and less portable.
  7. API-Driven: OIDC excels in API and mobile app use cases, offering greater flexibility than SAML.

My experience working with SAML and OIDC

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of building SAML and OIDC implementations, from both relying party AND identity provider side, and I can tell you that OIDC was 5x easier.

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of implementing both SAML and OIDC protocols from both the identity provider (IdP) and relying party/service provider (SP) perspectives. Through this experience, I’ve come to appreciate the stark differences in complexity and security between the two, and I can confidently say that OIDC is significantly simpler and more secure.

Implementing SAML often felt cumbersome and required extensive configuration. For example, our OIDC configuration only needed a name for the integration and a redirect URI, while SAML required seven mandatory fields and another three or more optional ones, making the setup process confusing and error-prone. Reading through the SAML specifications only added to the complexity. There are over ten auxiliary documents in addition to the core spec, most of which are rarely used in practice. (Have you ever encountered the SAML Artifact Resolution Protocol? Neither have most people.)

My experience integrating SAML with Shibboleth, a protocol built on top of SAML that is widely used by higher education institutions in the U.S., further magnified these challenges. It added more confusing configuration and specifications on top of the already intricate SAML, further increasing the complexity of integration. Shibboleth compounded this challenge by lacking a user interface, instead relying on manually edited and uploaded configuration files.

In contrast, OIDC was refreshingly lightweight and straightforward. Most modern applications support it, and the implementation process was intuitive. The OIDC spec was far easier to digest, with a clear focus on security, explicitly detailing the purpose and security benefits of each parameter. This made it much easier to implement correctly and confidently. Additionally, there are numerous excellent resources and open-source libraries available for OIDC, offering flexibility in how deep or customized your implementation needs to be, whether you're building a simple integration or a more advanced solution.

How to upgrade from SAML to OIDC in 5 simple steps

  1. Assess Your Current Environment: Understand your existing authentication flows, logic, and dependencies. Identify all applications and systems relying on SAML authentication.
  2. Define Requirements: Determine your authentication needs, such as single sign-on (SSO), multi-factor authentication (MFA), or API compatibility, and ensure your chosen OIDC provider supports them.
  3. Set Up OIDC Authentication Alongside SAML: Configure OIDC authentication in parallel to your existing SAML setup. This allows for gradual transition without disrupting user access.
  4. Test OIDC Authentication: Test OIDC thoroughly to ensure users can log in without issues. Validate functionality across all integrated apps and platforms.
  5. Decommission SAML: Once OIDC is fully operational and stable, phase out SAML. Since users won't notice any difference in their login experience, this step can be completed smoothly.

Conclusion

OIDC is the modern choice for authentication, offering simplicity, scalability, and seamless integration for today’s mobile and API-driven world. Upgrading from SAML to OIDC enhances security, improves user experience, and future-proofs your identity strategy.

OIDC vs. SAML: Understanding the Differences and Upgrading to Modern Authentication

Phishing resistance in security solutions has become a necessity. Learn the differences between the solutions and what you need to be phishing resistant.

When adding authentication to your application, choosing the right authentication standard is critical for ensuring secure and seamless user experiences. Two of the most widely used protocols in identity management are Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) and OpenID Connect (OIDC). While both serve the same fundamental purpose—enabling single sign-on (SSO) and user authentication—their architectures, use cases, and strengths differ significantly. There’s a whole lot to unpack about both standards (see the hefty SAML core spec and OIDC spec) but this guide will give you a brief overview.

If your organization is considering adding authentication to your product, this guide will help you determine what is right for you (hint: it’s OIDC!). Or, if your organization is considering upgrading from SAML to OIDC, we will help you understand the differences and navigate the migration process.

What is SAML?

SAML (SAML 2.0 since 2005), or Security Assertion Markup Language, is an XML-based authentication protocol designed primarily for web-based applications. It enables single sign-on (SSO) by allowing users to authenticate once and access multiple applications without needing to log in again. 

Key Features of SAML:

  • XML-Based Assertions: Exchanges XML-based assertions about the user’s identity, using the browser as a method of transporting messages between the relying party and identity provider.
  • Broad Adoption: Widely supported in enterprise environments.
  • Certificate-Based Trust: Certificates are exchanged between the identity provider and relying party and used to prove authenticity.

However, SAML is not without limitations. It can be overly complex to implement and maintain, especially as organizations move toward mobile-first and cloud-native architectures. 

For instance, mobile apps often require workarounds to support SAML, such as embedding webviews for login. Certificate rotation in SAML is also often a manual process that requires coordination between the identity provider and relying parties, leading to downtime if not handled properly.

What is OIDC?

OpenID Connect (OIDC) is a modern authentication protocol built on top of OAuth 2.0. It’s designed for secure, lightweight communication between clients (e.g., mobile apps, web apps) and identity providers. OIDC allows relying parties to verify an end user’s identity and obtain basic end-user profile information.

Key Features of OIDC:

  • JSON-Based Tokens: Uses JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) for lightweight and efficient communication.
  • Mobile and API-friendly: Optimized for modern applications and RESTful APIs.
  • Key-Based Trust: Uses JSON Web Keys to sign and validate tokens.

OIDC addresses many of the challenges posed by SAML, making it the preferred choice for cloud and mobile-first organizations.

Why choose OIDC over SAML?


Feature SAML OIDC

Protocol Structure

XML-based, which can grow large and difficult to handle

Lightweight JWTs, requiring minimal processing

Compatibility

Legacy Systems, Web

Modern Web & Mobile Apps
Scalability and Performance SAML has been widely used for the past 20 years Leaner, more flexible, and compatible with more modern technologies

OIDC offers several advantages over SAML, making it the preferred choice for modern applications:

  1. Lightweight and Modern: Built on OAuth 2.0, OIDC uses JSON Web Tokens (JWT) and REST APIs, simplifying integration compared to SAML’s XML-heavy structure.
  2. Mobile-First Design: OIDC is designed for mobile and single-page applications, while SAML is better suited for traditional web apps.
  3. Developer-Friendly: OIDC’s simplicity, robust libraries, and documentation streamline implementation, unlike SAML's steep learning curve.
  4. Dynamic Key Management: OIDC supports seamless key rotation via jwks_uri, whereas SAML requires manual X.509 certificate management.
  5. Broader Ecosystem: OIDC integrates easily with modern APIs, cloud-native systems, and providers like Google and Microsoft.
  6. Token Portability: OIDC’s compact JWTs are versatile and easily shared, while SAML assertions are bulky and less portable.
  7. API-Driven: OIDC excels in API and mobile app use cases, offering greater flexibility than SAML.

My experience working with SAML and OIDC

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of building SAML and OIDC implementations, from both relying party AND identity provider side, and I can tell you that OIDC was 5x easier.

At Beyond Identity, I’ve had the privilege of implementing both SAML and OIDC protocols from both the identity provider (IdP) and relying party/service provider (SP) perspectives. Through this experience, I’ve come to appreciate the stark differences in complexity and security between the two, and I can confidently say that OIDC is significantly simpler and more secure.

Implementing SAML often felt cumbersome and required extensive configuration. For example, our OIDC configuration only needed a name for the integration and a redirect URI, while SAML required seven mandatory fields and another three or more optional ones, making the setup process confusing and error-prone. Reading through the SAML specifications only added to the complexity. There are over ten auxiliary documents in addition to the core spec, most of which are rarely used in practice. (Have you ever encountered the SAML Artifact Resolution Protocol? Neither have most people.)

My experience integrating SAML with Shibboleth, a protocol built on top of SAML that is widely used by higher education institutions in the U.S., further magnified these challenges. It added more confusing configuration and specifications on top of the already intricate SAML, further increasing the complexity of integration. Shibboleth compounded this challenge by lacking a user interface, instead relying on manually edited and uploaded configuration files.

In contrast, OIDC was refreshingly lightweight and straightforward. Most modern applications support it, and the implementation process was intuitive. The OIDC spec was far easier to digest, with a clear focus on security, explicitly detailing the purpose and security benefits of each parameter. This made it much easier to implement correctly and confidently. Additionally, there are numerous excellent resources and open-source libraries available for OIDC, offering flexibility in how deep or customized your implementation needs to be, whether you're building a simple integration or a more advanced solution.

How to upgrade from SAML to OIDC in 5 simple steps

  1. Assess Your Current Environment: Understand your existing authentication flows, logic, and dependencies. Identify all applications and systems relying on SAML authentication.
  2. Define Requirements: Determine your authentication needs, such as single sign-on (SSO), multi-factor authentication (MFA), or API compatibility, and ensure your chosen OIDC provider supports them.
  3. Set Up OIDC Authentication Alongside SAML: Configure OIDC authentication in parallel to your existing SAML setup. This allows for gradual transition without disrupting user access.
  4. Test OIDC Authentication: Test OIDC thoroughly to ensure users can log in without issues. Validate functionality across all integrated apps and platforms.
  5. Decommission SAML: Once OIDC is fully operational and stable, phase out SAML. Since users won't notice any difference in their login experience, this step can be completed smoothly.

Conclusion

OIDC is the modern choice for authentication, offering simplicity, scalability, and seamless integration for today’s mobile and API-driven world. Upgrading from SAML to OIDC enhances security, improves user experience, and future-proofs your identity strategy.

Book

OIDC vs. SAML: Understanding the Differences and Upgrading to Modern Authentication

Phishing resistance in security solutions has become a necessity. Learn the differences between the solutions and what you need to be phishing resistant.

Download the book

By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information.