Skip to main content
0-Doubt
NewsInvestorsQuestionnairesDeveloperHelp
AnonymousSign in
0-Doubt — neutral IT/Security research
BrowseResellersCertified analystsRFI/RFP questionnairesHow trust worksHelp & FAQAPI
  1. Home/
  2. Ping Identity

Ping Identity

enriched
Identity & Access Management

Represented by Carahsoft ↗

pingidentity.com ↗ · required email domain for this vendor's users

Headquartered in United StatesHeadquarters countrySourced only from this vendor's own published headquarters address (schema.org structured data on their site) — never guessed from domain TLD. Source ↗

Do you work at Ping Identity?

This profile was built from public sources and hasn't been claimed yet. Claiming it lets you correct what's wrong and add details only you can confirm — and marks that information as vendor-verified for buyers.

Free, and it does not affect ranking, placement, or comparison results. The first person verified on Ping Identity's email domain becomes the profile admin.

Claim this profileAlready have an account?

Trust profileHow to read thisFive separate questions a buyer actually asks, each answered with its own evidence and a link to the source. There is deliberately no overall score: a single number invites comparison it cannot support, and would mostly reflect how much of Ping Identity we have managed to scan rather than anything about the vendor.

Not checked means we have not looked yet, and is never counted against a vendor. Limited means we did look, but found only one line of evidence — enough to report, not enough to corroborate.

checked 11 of 16 signals
  • Limited

    Independently verified

    Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?

    checked 3 of 4

    Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.

    • No third-party certifications found
    • Profile not claimed by the vendor
  • Strong

    Operating durability

    Is this a real, durable business?

    checked 3 of 4

    How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.

    • Domain registered 2001 — 24 years ago
    • Headquarters: United States
  • Mixed

    Behaviour under stress

    What do they do when something goes wrong?

    checked 2 of 3

    What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.

    • 13 published CVE(s) — a public disclosure record exists
    • 3 rated critical
    • Publishes a public status page
  • Limited

    Disclosure posture

    Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?

    checked 2 of 3

    How much this vendor volunteers before you have to ask.

    • No trust center found
    • No bug bounty or vulnerability disclosure policy found
  • Limited

    Momentum

    Are they still shipping, or coasting?

    checked 1 of 2

    Whether this vendor is visibly still building.

    • Public GitHub org with 184 repositories
Data coverage: 18/100What this measures (and doesn't)

Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.

Verification depth0/100
Security signal0/100
Buyer feedbackno data yet (0 reviews so far)
Profile completeness38/100
claim · HQ · materials · screenshots · integrations · certifications · security check

The platform admin controls the formula's weights.

Data coverage profileHow to read thisThe same four components behind the data coverage score above, shaped instead of listed — a vendor strong on verification but thin on buyer feedback looks visibly different from one that's the other way around. Security and feedback plot at the neutral midpoint (50) when there's no data yet (no products tracked, no reviews), matching how the actual score itself treats missing data — not a guess either way.

VerificationSecurityFeedbackCompletenessThis vendor — Verification: 0This vendor — Security: 0This vendor — Feedback: no data yetThis vendor — Completeness: 38

IntegrationsUI-12 — integration graphDetected from this vendor's own published integration/partner pages by the enrichment loop — each entry links the exact page it was found on. Directional: "integrates with" is claimed by this vendor; "integrated by" is claimed by the other vendor's site. Coverage grows as the scan progresses.

30 detected

Integrated by: 1Kosmos, Adaptive Security, D3 Security, Exaforce, Expel, FusionAuth, IRONSCALES, Keepnet Labs, Kentik, Mi-Token, OLOID, Oleria, OutThink, PhishingBox, PointGuard AI, Pomerium, Portal26, Proofpoint, Prophet Security, SentinelOne, SpyCloud, Ubiq Security, UncommonX, Uno, Upwind, Zscaler, iProov, simeio, specterops, spin.ai

Buyer reviewsUI-14 — verified-buyer reviewsWritten only by domain-verified buyers at other companies, attributed to their company domain (never their identity), and moderated. Buyer-sourced opinion, clearly separate from the neutral catalog facts above — and never an input to search or comparison ordering.

verified buyers only

No buyer reviews yet.

Reputation ratingUI-20 — anonymous ratingA single anonymous 5-star signal from buyers, resellers, and analysts who've engaged with this vendor — separate from the domain-attributed reviews above. No rater identity is ever shown, not even at company level.

anonymous

No ratings in this window yet.

External ratingsUI-22 — third-party ratingsAggregate rating and review count pulled directly from the source site's own published data — never the review text itself, which belongs to that site. Links go to the real page so you can read the actual reviews there.

via third-party review sites
PeerSpot: 4.1/5 (32 reviews) ↗

Identity and access management (incl. ForgeRock). AI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →

Security & trust signalsAbout these signalsCertifications are keyword-matched from the vendor's own public pages (each claim links to its source — verify directly before relying on it). Security headers are checked live against the vendor's homepage, re-checked every 90 days. Both are independent, automated signals, not a vendor-submitted or audited claim, and are not blended into a single score.

9 of 9 technical checks completed — not a score, just coverage

Security headers (3/5) — checked 8/13/2026

  • ✓ Strict-Transport-Security
  • ✓ Content-Security-Policy
  • ✕ X-Frame-Options
  • ✓ X-Content-Type-Options
  • ✕ Referrer-Policy
  • ✕ security.txt

Infrastructure & transparency signals

Status: operational ↗GitHub (184 repos) ↗Domain since 2001

Status historyAbout this timelineEvery incident detected on this vendor's own public status page since we started watching it — sourced from the same structural check as the status chip above, checked roughly hourly (every 5 minutes while an incident is active), never inferred. A resolution requires a real check confirming "operational" again; an incident with no resolution yet shown is still ongoing as of the most recent check.

No outages recorded since we started watching (first checked Aug 13, 2026, 8:32 PM).

CVE severity over timeUI-24 — CVE severity timelineEvery known CVE with a disclosure date and severity, plotted by when it was published — lets you see whether disclosures are trending toward more or less severe, not just a raw count. Same NVD-sourced, name-matched data as the list below.

LOWMEDIUMHIGHCRITICAL20152016201720182019202020212022202320242025CVE-2025-20059 · CRITICAL 9.1 · 2025-02-20CVE-2018-25084 · LOW 3.5 · 2023-04-10CVE-2022-23718 · HIGH 7.6 · 2022-07-01CVE-2021-41770 · HIGH 7.5 · 2021-10-07CVE-2021-40329 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-09-27CVE-2021-31923 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2021-09-24CVE-2021-39270 · HIGH 7.5 · 2021-08-18CVE-2020-10654 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2020-05-13CVE-2019-13564 · MEDIUM 6.1 · 2019-07-11CVE-2017-6059 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-04-13CVE-2014-8489 · MEDIUM 6.4 · 2014-12-12

Known CVEs (13)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. This is a name-based match, not exact version tracking — always check the linked NVD record for affected versions before drawing conclusions. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score.

RSS ⇢
  • CVE-2026-20746 ↗2026

    Virtual attribute handling in Ping Identity PingDirectory in affected versions allows only authorized users to exhaust java memory heap when recent login history is enabled and copying virtual attribu…

  • CVE-2025-20059 ↗CRITICAL 9.12025

    Relative Path Traversal vulnerability in Ping Identity PingAM Java Policy Agent allows Parameter Injection.This issue affects PingAM Java Policy Agent: through 5.10.3, through 2023.11.1, through 2024.…

  • CVE-2024-23316 ↗2024

    HTTP request desynchronization in Ping Identity PingAccess, all versions prior to 8.0.1 affected allows an attacker to send specially crafted http header requests to create a request smuggling conditi…

  • CVE-2018-25084 ↗LOW 3.52023

    A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in Ping Identity Self-Service Account Manager 1.1.2. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file src/main/java…

  • CVE-2022-23718 ↗HIGH 7.62022

    PingID Windows Login prior to 2.8 uses known vulnerable components that can lead to remote code execution. An attacker capable of achieving a sophisticated man-in-the-middle position, or to compromise…

  • CVE-2021-41770 ↗HIGH 7.52021

    Ping Identity PingFederate before 10.3.1 mishandles pre-parsing validation, leading to an XXE attack that can achieve XML file disclosure.

  • CVE-2021-40329 ↗CRITICAL 9.82021

    The Authentication API in Ping Identity PingFederate before 10.3 mishandles certain aspects of external password management.

  • CVE-2021-31923 ↗MEDIUM 5.32021

    Ping Identity PingAccess before 5.3.3 allows HTTP request smuggling via header manipulation.

  • CVE-2021-39270 ↗HIGH 7.52021

    In Ping Identity RSA SecurID Integration Kit before 3.2, user impersonation can occur.

  • CVE-2020-10654 ↗CRITICAL 9.82020

    Ping Identity PingID SSH before 4.0.14 contains a heap buffer overflow in PingID-enrolled servers. This condition can be potentially exploited into a Remote Code Execution vector on the authenticating…

  • CVE-2019-13564 ↗MEDIUM 6.12019

    XSS exists in Ping Identity Agentless Integration Kit before 1.5.

  • CVE-2017-6059 ↗HIGH 7.52017

    Mod_auth_openidc.c in the Ping Identity OpenID Connect authentication module for Apache (aka mod_auth_openidc) before 2.14 allows remote attackers to spoof page content via a malicious URL provided to…

  • CVE-2014-8489 ↗MEDIUM 6.42014

    Open redirect vulnerability in startSSO.ping in the SP Endpoints in Ping Identity PingFederate 6.10.1 allows remote attackers to redirect users to arbitrary web sites and conduct phishing attacks via …

Competitors (13)

full alternatives comparison →
Okta1PasswordAbbey LabsAceissAirrivedAkeyless SecurityAlcorAlibaba CloudAndromeda SecurityAponoAqueraARCONArexdata

Strengths & gaps by category

neutral · vendor-sourced

Drawn from this vendor's own public materials and authored to keep category questionnaires balanced. Gaps reflect capabilities not emphasized in public materials, not rankings.

Identity & Access Management (source)

Strengths: Standards-rich workforce and customer IAM (SSO, MFA, authorization, identity verification, ForgeRock heritage) with flexible deployment.

Gaps: Breadth and configurability can mean integration complexity; governance depth is less central than access.

Products (9)

Identity & Access Management

9
  • ForgeRock Identity PlatformIAMAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →
    Identity and access management.
  • Ping AuthorizationAuthorizationAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Policy-based granular access control.
  • Ping Identity PlatformAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Identity and access management platform for authentication and authorization
  • Ping Identity VerificationVerificationAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Confirm real-world identity.
  • Ping MFA & PasswordlessMFAAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Multi-factor and passwordless authentication.
  • Ping Single Sign-OnSSOAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Single sign-on across applications.
  • Ping Threat ProtectionThreat protectionAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    AI-driven fraud and threat detection.
  • PingFederateFederation/SSOAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →
    Enterprise federation and SSO.
  • PingOne Cloud PlatformIAMAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →
    Identity and access management platform.