OIDC vs SAML: Why B2B Teams Will Likely Need Both Protocols
When enterprise clients request single sign-on (SSO), B2B software teams typically face a choice between two protocols: OIDC, introduced in 2014 and built on JSON and OAuth 2.0, and SAML, a 2005 XML-based standard still dominant in large organizations. In practice, developers rarely get to choose freely — the client's existing IT infrastructure, whether a legacy on-premise identity provider or a modern platform like Okta, determines which protocol is required. OIDC is generally preferred for first-party apps, modern web applications, and clients using current identity platforms, while SAML remains unavoidable for enterprise clients with older systems. Both protocols carry security risks, but SAML's XML signature validation is considered especially error-prone, with well-documented vulnerabilities such as signature wrapping attacks affecting even experienced teams. As a result, most B2B products serving enough enterprise customers will eventually need to support both protocols simultaneously.
This is an AI-generated summary. ShortSingh links to the original source for the complete article.


Discussion (0)
Log in to join the discussion and vote.
Log in