3 ms·
Yes, but also a bit of muddled. Let's take SSO for example. In the early days of Okta/Ping/OneLogin - Lets call it 2015. SAML was a big cost add-on to almost e
by ShakataGaNai 5y ago
Yes, but also a bit of muddled.
Let's take SSO for example. In the early days of Okta/Ping/OneLogin - Lets call it 2015. SAML was a big cost add-on to almost every service. At the time most services (with a few exceptions like Zendesk and Salesforce) charged you a decent proserve fee for setting it up, because it was a manual setup process for them. It was hard/time consuming/etc.
For the time, that makes total sense. But since then SAML libraries and usage have matured. You can write less than 100 line python/flask application that supports SAML. So while SAML was, at one point, actually expensive (by person hours, both engineering and PS) to implement ... it no longer is. Companies are just continuing to charge for it in most cases... because they can get away with it.
The real problem with SSO in general, at least currently, is that it's not viewed as a necessity for all businesses (even though it is). A company a decade ago could sign up for the cheap Slack edition and be happy with that through 100+ employees. Now a company of 5 or 10 may already have SSO and therefor need to goto a Slack edition that is twice as expensive - simply for that one feature.
- tptacek 5y agoSAML libraries are still pretty unsafe. But I agree with you: the cost of actually delivering SSO features has nothing to do with why they're taxed.