B2C and B2B SaaS Authentication Architectures

Reading Time: 6 minutes

In the context of both Business-to-Consumer (B2C) and Business-to-Business (B2B) SaaS, CIAM solutions must address the distinct needs of both the similarities and the differences between these segments.

Where B2C refers to services designed for individual customers, B2B refers to services intended for organizations, typically with a more complex structure involving multiple users, roles, and permissions. These differences require varied approaches to authentication, particularly when it comes to handling scalability, complexity, security, and user experience.

As businesses increasingly rely on SaaS solutions, CIAM integrations must adapt to meet the diverse authentication needs. The architectural decisions made in B2C and B2B contexts are key to creating secure and user-friendly environments that facilitate smooth interactions and protect against unauthorized access.

I’m Peter Fernandez, and in this article, I’m going to explore the various architectural scenarios for CIAM integration within B2C and B2B SaaS environments, showcasing similarities and also how requirements differ.

Key Scenarios in B2C Architectures

In a B2C architecture, the user experience is paramount because the focus is on individual users. Authentication solutions need to be user-friendly, yet robust enough to protect sensitive data. B2C authentication emphasizes ease of use, scalability, and a wide range of user authentication methods, from basic to advanced options using predominantly the OIDC and OAuth 2.0 protocols. B2C environments typically prioritize simplicity, ease of use, and speed in the authentication processes to cater for a typically large base.

Single Sign-On (SSO)

Single Sign-On (SSO) allows a user to log into multiple applications or services with a single authentication. It also allows users to sign in with different accounts whilst at the same time providing for a single user profile no matter which account a user chooses to use. In a B2C context, SSO often integrates with the Social login options like Google, Facebook, or Apple.

B2C applications typically connect with Social identity providers through the use of the OpenID Connect (OIDC) or OAuth 2.0 protocols. When a user logs into an application for the first time, the authentication process is handled by the third-party identity provider (e.g., Google), and once authenticated the SaaS application grants access based on the information returned from the upstream identity provider.

Whilst the use of SSO provides multiple benefits (as described in my article above), there are a number of challenges that a CIAM integration will typically need to cater for:

• Dependence on Third-Party Providers: If a social login provider experiences downtime or security breaches, it can impact users’ ability to authenticate.
• Limited Control: Organizations have less control over the authentication flow and user data.

Multi-factor Authentication

Multi-factor Authentication (MFA) is implemented to add an additional layer of security beyond first-factor credentials. This could include SMS-based OTP (One-Time Passcode), email OTP, Magic Link, or push notifications from an authentication app. If a system detects a higher risk (e.g., a new device or location), or requires some step-up operation, it can prompt the user to provide a second factor as described in the article below.

Whilst this provides additional security — reducing the risk of unauthorized access by requiring multiple pieces of evidence of the user’s identity — and helps users feel more secure, there can be challenges a CIAM integration will need to overcome:

• User Friction: While MFA is more secure, it can create a friction point for users, especially if the second factor is delayed (e.g., slow delivery when using SMS).
• Vulnerability: Some MFA architectures can be vulnerable to attack, such as SIM-swapping in SMS-based MFA scenarios or other Man-In-The-Middle (MITM) attacks associated with email and the like.

Passwordless Authentication

Passwordless authentication methods eliminate the need for users to remember and enter passwords and can include methods such as magic links or biometric verification via the use of Passkeys (read the article below to discover more).

When a user attempts to log in, instead of entering a password, the SaaS application uses another credential to validate a user’s authenticity; in the case of Passkeys rolling first-factor authentication and MFA into one seamless operation.

This has the obvious benefit that users do not need to remember or manage passwords, and without passwords, there are fewer opportunities for password-based malicious activity, such as phishing or brute force attacks. However, it’s not without challenges that a successful CIAM integration must seek to address:

• Resource Dependency: If the user cannot access their email, say, or doesn’t have access to the device on which their Passkey is stored, they cannot authenticate.
• User Confusion: Users may not be familiar with passwordless methods, leading to potential confusion or abandonment.

Key Scenarios in B2B Architectures

In B2B architectures, the authentication process is more intricate due to the involvement of multiple users within a single organization, different levels of access, and access control requirements (et al). Whilst many of the key B2C considerations like MFA and SSO are also a requirement, B2B SaaS CIAM is more focused on security, the granularity of access control, and integration with enterprise identity providers optionally using SAML protocol.

Multitenancy

In software architecture, multitenancy allows a single instance of a (B2B SaaS) application to serve multiple, discrete customer communities by logically isolating data and configurations, while sharing the same underlying infrastructure.

Logical isolation is often referred to using the term tenant or tenancy, where a tenant essentially provides all of the setup particular to a specific user community. From a CIAM perspective, this requires a way of associating a user with the tenant to which they are subscribed.

However, tenancy doesn’t necessarily mean that the users in each community are discrete (i.e. members of only a single tenant). You may have a situation where there is a need to support users who can be associated with more than one tenant — i.e. where a user is a customer subscribed to more than one tenant of a B2B SaaS application. In this case, it may be important to separate certain user preferences by potentially creating aspects of a user’s profile that are common across all subscriptions as well as aspects that are unique (to a particular subscription).

Federated Identity

(Enterprise) Federation allows an organization to use its existing identity provider (IdP) to authenticate users across multiple SaaS platforms without maintaining separate user accounts for each service. This approach typically uses protocols like SAML or OpenID Connect.

In this case, a B2B organization integrates its corporate identity provider (e.g., Microsoft Active Directory, Okta, or Google Workspace) with a third-party SaaS application, and when users attempt to log in, the SaaS platform redirects them to the enterprise IdP for authentication. After successful authentication, the IdP sends a SAML Assertion or OIDC ID Token back to the SaaS platform, granting access.

The main benefits of a federated approach include:

• Centralized User Management: Enterprises only need to manage user identities and permissions in one central location.
• Improved Security: By relying on trust relationships, organizations ensure that robust security practices (like MFA or conditional access) are applied to all connected services.

However, the federated approach doesn’t come without potential challenges:

• Integration Complexity: Integrating a B2B SaaS platform to leverage the various corporate IdPs can be a complex and time-consuming process.
• Single Point of Failure: If the federated IdP is compromised or experiences downtime, users may be unable to authenticate to any connected service.

Access Control

In B2B SaaS scenarios, managing permission is critical for ensuring that users can only access the resources they are authorized to view or modify. An access control mechanism like RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) will often integrate tightly with the authentication process, assigning user permissions as they authenticate.

SaaS systems can then retrieve a user’s Role(s) from claims provided by the federated identity provider, which can help determine which resources or actions the user can access within the SaaS platform — enabling organizations to precisely control who can access specific features or data based on said user’s role. Using RBAC can also help simplify tracking and reporting for compliance with regulations (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA, etc).

However, whilst RBAC does play a useful role, it does have challenges that leveraging the likes of ABAC (Attribute-Based Access Control) and ReBAC (Relationship-Based Access Control), in addition, can solve; see the article below for more details, too:

• Role Management Complexity: Managing a large number of roles, especially in larger organizations, can become complex and cumbersome.
• Overlapping Permissions: If roles are not carefully defined, users may receive excessive permissions or be incorrectly restricted.

Contextual and Adaptive Authentication

Contextual or adaptive authentication dynamically adjusts the authentication requirements based on factors such as the user’s location, device, or time of access.

Whilst this can also be beneficial in B2C situations, in a B2B SaaS environment, analyzing contextual factors — such as login attempts from a new device or unusual geographic location — is particularly useful in determining risk level(s) upon which assessment for additional verification (e.g., MFA) can be made.

Benefits:

• Security and User Experience: Provides stronger authentication when risk is high, but allows users to authenticate easily under low-risk circumstances.
• Reduced Friction: Prevents unnecessary authentication challenges for users on trusted devices or in familiar locations.

Challenges:

• Risk Calculation Complexity: Accurately assessing the risk level of login attempts requires sophisticated algorithms and data analysis.
• User Confusion: Legitimate users may be blocked or delayed due to misinterpreted context, leading to frustration.

B2C to B2B Evolution and Beyond

An effective CIAM integration can pave the way for B2C applications to more readily evolve to service a B2B SaaS audience as well. For example, with the right CIAM implementation, a B2C travel-oriented application or a B2C application for (project) planning, say, can be packaged to provide service to user communities across multiple organizations.

An effective CIAM integration can also easily support the various permutations often seen in a B2B SaaS context. B2B2C — a business model where two companies collaborate to deliver SaaS solutions to the same end customer — or B2B2B, a business model where two companies collaborate to deliver SaaS solutions to another business, are just two examples of other possible B2B style opportunities that can be realised.

For more information on choosing the right CIAM approach, see the article entitled: