Identity providers, discussed without a named connector list

What is in the product today is clear. Sign-in lives at app.mygtos.com, separate from this marketing site. Two-step sign-in is available on the GTOS app. After sign-in, role-based access decides what each person can see, inside per-client data separation. Those controls are the starting point of a security review, whether or not single sign-on is later configured. GTOS is the Global Travel Operating System from Voraal, built on operating experience across 100,000+ trips.

How an identity conversation is scoped

If your company requires SSO, bring the identity setup you actually use to a demo. We will talk about what can be connected, what would be configured during implementation, and what is not available. We will not invent protocol badges, and we will not imply that a successful SSO project replaces roles, two-step sign-in where your security team still requires it, or the company data boundary.

See Security and security questions for the wider model. We do not claim ISO, SOC or similar certifications we do not hold.

Why this sits under integrations

Buyers look for identity next to HR and finance connections because access is part of joining the platform to the rest of the company. It still has to be described with the same discipline as HRIS and ERP: no named certified list, a scoped conversation, and a product fact that already exists without that list.

USD is the main currency on this site. Pricing is in USD and available on request. GTOS is built to scale to 1,000+ employees per client, which is often when SSO becomes a formal requirement. Each company sees only its own data.

A demo can walk current sign-in and roles first, then take your identity requirement as a scoping question, which is the order a security reviewer usually prefers. Bring the identity setup you actually use, and the questions your security team already asks about second factors, role changes and departure of an employee. The session should be equally clear about what is in the product today and about what would only exist after a scoped SSO implementation. Security reviewers usually prefer that split to a named-provider list that cannot be evidenced. Walk the current sign-in model first, then write down the SSO questions that remain, so the implementation scope does not get confused with the product as it stands today. Two-step sign-in and roles are present now; SSO remains a scoped conversation unless and until it is agreed. Keep that sentence in the notes from the meeting. It will be the line security reviewers look for later, and it should stay accurate.