Hacker News Reader

Comment by arcza | Hacker News Reader

Probably the department's fault for not using (presumably) Entra Conditional Access to restrict SSO to corporate devices / corporate subnets.

This is why if you're building a product, please give SSO for free (see sso.tax) - you shift responsibility, requirements and posture to the tenant's IdP.

View on HN

Unfortunately that will make you a lot less money. The whole premise of the sso.tax seems based on that it's not intentional.

It is intentional and deliberate price discrimination to charge enterprises more. One example: why do you think enterprises don't just stack consumer/teams Codex or Claude subs with significant subsidies; given that all enterprise seats are API/PAYG now? SSO/IdP + ability to opt out of training globally

SSO is a core security feature, not a value add. I do not mind charging extra for say SCIM or advanced RBAC. I have a different view to business than most SaaS apps, and feel when you bring value and delight to the customer, they take you as a trustworthy partner and want to grow with you. Trust is very important and I feel so bitter paying Bitwarden, Adobe, and all the other enshittified stacks that 30-100% uplift on the base plan to get SSO. I also love my homelab stuff and it's a sour taste when I need to set up some system with local auth. yeah, maybe some nerd's A/B test show charging SSO makes more money, that's a shame and I think long term it's simply harmful (and probably less profitable due to my comment on stickyness and delighting customers being good business sense).

Only a tech nerd would think the solution to massive overreach by government organizations and illegal use of mass surveillance tools is more technology from one of the participating technology companies...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com