[Eridrus]

I think you don't understand the core argument re the SSO Tax, which is that security is a positive sum good, which is why it should not be the feature used for price discrimination.

Not all products have other good features to use for price discrimination, so I have some sympathy for vendors here, but I think it often indicates laziness in thinking about what they can use to do the necessary price discrimination.

[prabhatsharma]

I do understand it's super important for security, and I want large companies who have ample money and spend a lot on security to pay me as well for it. If you are running OpenObserve in your basement or are a small startup you get it for free in OpenObserve and stay secure.

[Eridrus]

I want large companies to pay you too, but SSO is not a purely large company feature. There are plenty of companies with more than 10 developers that are not large companies.

[magicalhippo]

We're in that position. We make B2B software and just increased to 12 devs. Due to security demands from customers, SSO is a must for products like this and it frequently forces us into the enterprise bin.

[prabhatsharma]

OpenObserve offers free SSO on our cloud service to anyone and Free SSO for anyone using enterprise version if they ingest under 200 GB/Day (6 TB/Month).

This should cover all companies with 10 developers.

[thedevilslawyer]

So a small company with say 25 dev/employees with say 2 gb of data per day?

Edit: People here do get what you're saying - "This is the only way we can force some users to pay". What you're not hearing is "Either don't call out your software as FOSS, or if you do, figure out ways of price discriminating without hurting security for FOSS users."