OAuth vs Keycloak
The security dance everyone hates but can't live without meets the swiss army knife of iam—if you don't mind sharpening it yourself. Here's our take.
OAuth
The security dance everyone hates but can't live without. Delegating access without sharing passwords, because trust is a token.
OAuth
Nice PickThe security dance everyone hates but can't live without. Delegating access without sharing passwords, because trust is a token.
Pros
- +Eliminates password sharing for third-party apps
- +Standardized across major platforms like Google and Facebook
- +Granular scopes for fine-grained access control
Cons
- -Implementation complexity leads to frequent security flaws
- -Token management can be a debugging nightmare
Keycloak
The Swiss Army knife of IAM—if you don't mind sharpening it yourself.
Pros
- +Open-source with robust SSO and OAuth 2.0/OpenID Connect support
- +Built-in user federation and social login integrations
- +Fine-grained authorization policies for complex access control
Cons
- -Steep learning curve for advanced configurations
- -Can be resource-heavy and tricky to scale in production
The Verdict
These tools serve different purposes. OAuth is a authentication while Keycloak is a hosting & deployment. We picked OAuth based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.
Based on overall popularity. OAuth is more widely used, but Keycloak excels in its own space.
Disagree with our pick? nice@nicepick.dev