300+ Tools CoveredSource Data Updated Weeklydates

Tool intelligence profile

Keycloak

Open-source identity and access management — SSO, OIDC, OAuth 2.0 and SAML with user federation and identity brokering, self-hosted under Apache-2.0 as a CNCF project.

Visit Site →
Type
Identity Management
Category
Pricing
Free (open source)
Deployment
Self-hosted
Last updatedSeptember 20, 2026Open Source

Editor's Take

Best fit is an organisation with a large or fast-growing user base and the operational capacity to run a security-critical service, where a per-monthly-active-user meter would become the dominant line item. The trade-off is exactly that: Keycloak removes the bill and hands you availability, upgrades and incident response for the front door to every application you own. Not a fit for a small team with nobody to operate it, which will get better security outcomes from a hosted service even while paying per user.

— Egor Burlakov, Editor

Evaluate Keycloak

Keycloak: product and architecture

This Keycloak review covers the open-source identity and access management server that most teams reach for when they decide not to rent authentication by the user. Keycloak issues and validates tokens over OpenID Connect and OAuth 2.0, speaks SAML for the enterprise applications that still need it, federates users from LDAP and Active Directory, and brokers logins to social and enterprise identity providers. It is a CNCF project under the Apache-2.0 licence, run on your own infrastructure. We evaluated it against its official documentation, its licence and governance, and its GitHub repository, which carried 36,867 stars when we checked on 19 September 2026.

Overview

Keycloak exists to remove authentication from application code. Rather than each service implementing login, password reset, multi-factor prompts and session handling, they delegate to Keycloak and accept a token. That is the same proposition a hosted identity service makes; the difference is where it runs and how it is paid for.

The project began at Red Hat and is now a CNCF project, which matters for the buying decision in a specific way: there is no vendor with a per-user meter, and no commercial relationship to renegotiate as your user count grows. The cost is infrastructure and the people who operate it.

Keycloak organises tenancy through realms. A realm holds its own users, roles, clients and identity providers, which makes it practical to separate staff identity from customer identity inside one deployment without them seeing each other.

Key Features and Architecture

The protocol surface is the reason to choose it. Keycloak implements OpenID Connect and OAuth 2.0 for modern applications and SAML 2.0 for the estate that predates them, which means one server can sit in front of a React front end and a decade-old Java application at the same time.

User federation connects Keycloak to existing directories. It reads users from LDAP and Active Directory rather than requiring a migration, so an organisation whose staff identity already lives in AD can put Keycloak in front without moving anyone. Identity brokering covers the other direction: delegating login to an external provider, whether that is a social account or another organisation's SAML identity provider in a B2B arrangement.

Authorization services go past authentication. Keycloak can hold fine-grained permission policies — resources, scopes and policies evaluated centrally — for teams that want authorisation decisions out of application code as well.

The admin console is a full web interface over all of it: realms, clients, roles, federation, flows. Authentication flows are configurable, which is how multi-factor requirements, step-up authentication and custom steps get expressed without code.

Client integration is through standard protocol libraries rather than a proprietary SDK. The project publishes keycloak-js for browser applications; everything else can use any conformant OIDC or SAML client, which matters on exit as much as on entry — an estate that speaks standard protocols can be moved to another conformant server without rewriting every application against a new vendor's API.

Ideal Use Cases

Keycloak fits an organisation with the operational capacity to run a stateful, security-critical service and a reason to avoid per-user billing. That is most often a team with a large user count, where a monthly-active-user meter becomes the dominant line item.

It fits estates with mixed protocol requirements. If some applications need SAML and others OIDC, one Keycloak deployment covers both.

It fits data-residency and air-gapped requirements absolutely. Where user identity cannot leave your infrastructure or your jurisdiction, a hosted identity service is not a candidate and Keycloak is the obvious answer.

It fits teams that already run Kubernetes and Java services, where operating another JVM workload is routine rather than novel.

Do not use Keycloak if nobody on the team wants to own an authentication server. It is the front door to every application you have: upgrades, database backups, certificate rotation and availability are now yours. A small team without that capacity will get better security outcomes from a hosted service, even paying per user.

Pricing and Licensing

Keycloak is free under the Apache-2.0 licence, with no paid tier, no per-seat charge and no per-active-user meter. It is a CNCF project rather than a vendor product, so there is no commercial edition to be upsold to and no licence negotiation.

That does not make it free to operate. The real cost is a database, the compute to run the server, high availability if authentication must not go down — and it must not, because every application depends on it — plus the engineering time for upgrades and incident response. Keycloak releases frequently, and staying current is part of the commitment.

The comparison that matters is against per-monthly-active-user pricing. A hosted identity service such as Auth0 carries a free allowance and then bills by external monthly active users across named tiers, with enterprise terms quoted; its own pricing page is the place to read the current rates. The shape is what matters here: those costs scale with your success, and Keycloak's do not. We recommend modelling your own user growth against both shapes before deciding, because the crossover sits at a volume specific to your business rather than at any general threshold, and it moves with how many of your users are external customers rather than staff.

Strengths & Trade-offs

Pros

  • No per-user cost, ever. Apache-2.0 with no commercial edition means user growth does not change the bill.
  • OIDC, OAuth 2.0 and SAML in one server. A mixed estate does not need two identity products.
  • Federates instead of migrating. LDAP and Active Directory users stay where they are.
  • Realms give real separation. Staff and customer identity can live in one deployment without sharing a namespace.
  • Authorization services included. Fine-grained policy evaluation is available without a second product.

Cons

  • You are operating an authentication server. Availability, upgrades, backups and incident response all become yours, for a service every application depends on.
  • Configuration surface is large. Realms, clients, flows, mappers and federation providers reward expertise and punish guesswork.
  • JVM operational profile. Memory and tuning characteristics are a Java service's, which is unremarkable in a Java estate and a new skill in one that is not.

Alternatives to Keycloak

The reviewed substitutes for Keycloak among the identity management, and what would make each one the better answer.

Other approaches

A different approach to the same problem. Each substitutes only for the workload named beside it.

Auth0
The same job — single sign-on, OIDC, OAuth 2.0 and SAML in front of every application — bought two different ways. Auth0 is hosted and billed by external monthly active user; Keycloak is Apache-2.0, a CNCF project, and run on your own infrastructure with no per-user meter at all. Conditional rather than direct because the trade is not feature-for-feature: choosing Keycloak means taking on availability, upgrades and incident response for the front door to every application, which is a capacity question before it is a product one.Applies to: Providing authentication and single sign-on across an application estate. Keycloak stands in for Auth0 when the user count makes per-MAU billing the dominant cost, or when identity data must stay on your own infrastructure; Auth0 stands in when nobody should be operating an identity server and the user count stays predictable.
Explore all Keycloak alternatives →

Public signals

About these signals

Verified factual signals from public sources. They indicate observable activity or interest, not total adoption, product quality, or cost.

835 GitHub commits 90d36.9k GitHub stars0 vulnerabilities across 1 package

See all signals from 4 sources
Source
Signals
Last updated
GitHub
Commits 90d:835Stars:36.9k
September 21, 2026
npm
Weekly downloads:735.1k
September 21, 2026
Google Trends
Search interest:Top 15%overall
September 21, 2026
OSV
Package vulnerabilities:0 vulnerabilitiesacross 1 package

npm · keycloak-js@26.2.4

September 21, 2026

Frequently asked questions

Is Keycloak really free?

Yes. Keycloak is Apache-2.0 licensed and a CNCF project, with no paid tier, no per-seat charge and no per-active-user meter. The cost is the infrastructure it runs on and the engineering time to operate it, which for a security-critical service that every application depends on is not trivial.

Can Keycloak use our existing Active Directory?

Yes. User federation reads users from LDAP and Active Directory directly, so staff identity can stay where it is rather than being migrated. Keycloak sits in front as the token issuer.

Does Keycloak support SAML as well as OIDC?

Yes. It implements OpenID Connect and OAuth 2.0 alongside SAML 2.0, which is the main reason a mixed estate can put one server in front of both modern applications and older ones.

When is Auth0 the better choice than Keycloak?

When nobody on the team should be operating an authentication server, and the user count is modest or predictable enough that per-monthly-active-user pricing stays comfortable. A hosted service such as Auth0 carries a free MAU allowance and then bills by external monthly active user; its own pricing page carries the current rates. Keycloak's case strengthens as user numbers grow, or as data-residency rules rule out a hosted service entirely.

Related Identity Management

Other identity management in the catalog. Same kind of product, not a substitution recommendation.