Informa/
An identity-provider evaluation POC for Informa — comparing Microsoft Entra, Auth0, and PingOne against a shared protected app to make a defensible enterprise IdP decision.
Browse the project/
Swipe through the shipped surfaces — one screen at a time.
Pick an IdP by running the same code through three of them/
Enterprise identity choices get made on slide decks. This POC made it possible to make the call by running the same protected app through Entra, Auth0, and PingOne — and comparing what actually broke.
Informa needed to choose an enterprise identity provider for an internal portal. Rather than picking on features-on-paper, the brief was: build a single Next.js app, wire it to Microsoft Entra, Auth0, and PingOne behind a feature flag, and run real flows through each.
I built the harness — the protected app, the three IdP configurations, the login + token exchange + refresh + MFA flows — and produced a side-by-side comparison covering DX, role/claim mapping, session handling, MFA, and operational considerations.
The outcome was a defensible recommendation with the receipts to back it.
One Next.js app, three IdP backends/
A single Next.js app sits behind a feature flag that picks which IdP to use. The same protected route, the same role-mapping logic, the same UI — only the upstream identity changes.
- Single Next.js app, three IdP profiles
- Feature-flagged config (env-driven)
- Same protected route across all three IdPs
Login, refresh, MFA, sign-out — across all three/
Each IdP was wired through the same flow set: hosted login, silent refresh, MFA challenge, role-claim mapping, single sign-out. Anything that worked differently got documented.
- Hosted login + silent refresh
- MFA prompts standardized via OIDC step-up
- Role-claim mapping into the app's RBAC layer
A spreadsheet that picks a winner/
The deliverable wasn't the code — it was a comparison matrix covering DX, operational cost, claim mapping flexibility, MFA UX, audit logging, and lock-in risk. With the working POC behind every cell.
- DX score per IdP (auth lib, docs, debug-ability)
- Operational footprint (logging, runbooks, support)
- Lock-in + portability ratings
From the public site to the POC harness/
Context for the engagement plus the actual POC surfaces.
Choose an IdP by running the code/
If your team is debating identity providers and you want a working harness instead of a slide deck — that's exactly this engagement.