Cisco Duo Reviews

We use it for multi-factor authentication. That's the only use case we have now. We're not using it to its maximum capabilities but we'll use it for more functions moving forward.

Duo Security has improved our cybersecurity resilience. Multi-factor authentication gives us another layer of protection. Having another layer of security is very important for us.

Duo Security establishes trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from. This is something that's absolutely needed.

It's easy to deploy. It's easy to manage. It's easy to integrate with other applications. 

We also use it for single sign-on with Meraki and VPN access for non-Cisco firewalls, but we're now migrating to Cisco firewalls. It's easy to deploy, and it works.

I'm not using it as much as I could. So far, it has everything I need. I don't have any requirements or improvements. Everything is working smoothly, and we're happy with it.

We have been using Duo Security for about two years.

Its stability is great.

We have 1,500 users that use Duo Security. We're planning to use Duo Security for more applications, but the number of users won't increase anymore, so in terms of scalability, I don't think we'll have any issues.

We have opened some cases with Cisco for questions and things at all, and they were very helpful. They're very good. They answer questions quickly, and the people who work there are knowledgeable, so I can't complain. I'd rate them a ten out of ten because I got prompt responses and knowledgeable people.

We were using Microsoft Authenticator before, but we had a lot of problems with that, so we had to move away from that. Initially, we didn't have any multi-factor authentication, so having a multi-factor authentication for multiple applications and services that we provide helps us in making our network more secure.

You synchronize your AD with Duo Security and create all the groups for access.  You send the emails to do the deployment, and you load the cell phone numbers. That's for the end-user side, and for the firewall, we have the proxies. We're using a proxy for one of the products. Our firewall sends RADIUS requests to the proxy, and the proxy communicates to Duo Cloud. The virtual machine deployment for the process was very easy. The configuration takes a few steps, but it's easy.

We've both on-premise and cloud deployments. We're using the tool on the cloud, but we don't have any infrastructure on the cloud.

We did the deployment ourselves.

We have seen an ROI. The cost of not having it means you're vulnerable to hacking and other things. Nowadays, multi-factor authentication is required for insurance. It's a must now.

It's very simple. Its price is fair. We use the hardware tokens as well. You get what you pay for.

In terms of licensing, Cisco has very complicated products, but Duo Security was surprisingly easy. The licensing model is easy. The license is based on the intent. You can see how many licenses you have. It's one of the easiest solutions I have deployed, so I'm very happy about it. Every other Cisco product—such as switches, APs, wireless, and controllers—has a very complicated license model. The new smart license model doesn't always work. It's very complicated. The vendors will put your license somewhere else. You need to talk to vendors. It's complicated, but Duo Security licensing is simple.

We evaluated RSA, Microsoft, and Duo Security. We evaluated these three, and we realized that Duo Security had better reviews, and it was easier to deploy and cost-effective, so it made sense to use it.

Overall, I'd rate Duo Security a ten out of ten.

We use it for two-factor authentication (2FA) for accessing our portal.

From a security standpoint, 2FA is very crucial, and having a multitude of ways for consumers in your property to utilize 2FA is helpful.

Duo Security has its place in securing our infrastructure. It's great for that, but not for securing our infrastructure end to end because there's no such thing as an end-to-end cure for all the security.

It is great for reducing the risk of breaches. Having 2FA and making it simple for users, it reduces the risk of getting phished or scammed.

Duo Security considers all resources to be external, which is a good idea because everything is done in a completely untrusted model. It's absolutely important for us.

Our cybersecurity resilience has improved in one way. We were successfully able to deploy it to a base system. It's uniform across the whole property, and everyone is using it.

It's simple. It's reliable. I haven't had any issues with it.

It's fairly simple. Our end users don't have many issues with it other than getting locked out for administrative purposes, but it's not something to do with Duo Security. There might be a little slowness, but that could be my connection.

We have been using this solution in our company for about two years. I have been with the company since we started using it.

I haven't had any problems. In a worst-case scenario, there might be a little slowness, but that could be my connection. They're pretty proactive when they do have issues. I get alerts right away saying that Duo Security is having problems, and they are being looked into.

Their support is okay. They always respond. Sometimes you get really good engineers, and sometimes you don't, but at least they're there. I'd rate them a seven out of them.

Neutral

We had a few other systems. It was piecemeal. We were trying Okta at one point. We were doing demos of the products trying to find the right one. I've limited experience with them, but our security team did a full evaluation. A few times, I've seen demos, which was a while ago, they all seem to be pretty close. It's pretty tough out there. We might have been roped into Duo Security with some other deal that we did with Cisco.

I was not involved in its deployment. Our security team does most of the deployment factor on that. I do remember the provisioning process, and it seemed pretty painless. We have about 5,000 employees, and I'm sure getting the education to the users about what we're doing would have been an effort, but overall, it was pretty easy.

In terms of deployment, it's on the cloud. It's probably a hybrid cloud, but I'm not sure.

There's definitely a return on investment because one compromise can cost billions of dollars.

I'd rate Duo Security a nine out of ten. I haven't had any problems. It's great.

We use it for user logins for Windows workstations and Office 365. We have certain requirements for doing two-factor authentication.

Duo Security has improved our cybersecurity resilience with two-factor authentication.

Duo Security secures our infrastructure from end to end, especially in terms of what our end users are using. We get an alert if there's something unusual, which doesn't happen often, but it allows us to look at and remediate any issues. Fortunately, we haven't had any attacks that I know of, so it has been good. 

Duo Security does its job in terms of user authentication and device verification for helping to prevent identity-based attacks.

Duo Security reduces the risk of breaches. I haven't seen anything that I would switch to.

Duo Security seems to work for establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from. That's something that we ask of such solutions. I don't want to have to interact with it very much.

It's pretty easy for users to figure it out. We've largely non-technical people where I am. At first, there was a little bit of a speed bump trying to get everybody to understand why we were using it, but it wasn't too bad. Everybody pretty much embraced it. Its adoption happened over a course of a couple of weeks. It was fairly smooth.

We also use Cisco Secure Email and Cisco Umbrella. It integrates pretty well with them. We haven't had any issues.

From an administrative standpoint, I'd love to see it be a little better at remembering a device and location so that I don't have to continually authenticate. That's pretty much it.

We've been using it in our company for two years.

Its stability is good. We haven't had any outages.

Its scalability is also good. We haven't had any issues expanding it to everything. 

When I've had to engage with them, which is occasionally, their support has been good for me. I know our network engineer has run into an issue here and there, but I don't specifically know why. Personally, I haven't had any problems. I'd rate them a ten out of ten. They have solved everything so far.

Positive

I was not involved in its implementation, but I know it was smooth. I didn't hear of any issues, so it was pretty simple for us.

We have a hybrid deployment.

I'm pretty sure we do most of the things through Zones. They are good. I'd recommend them.

We've seen an ROI. We had to have it. It meets our needs.

We evaluated Microsoft's two-factor authentication. Other than that, we pretty much went straight for Duo just because we were in that ecosystem already. We didn't want to embrace Microsoft stuff. This was a better fit for what we needed. We were already in the Cisco ecosystem.

The Microsoft solution was also a bit limited. We were less likely to wire other devices. It was for Microsoft products at that time, but I don't know if it's changed.

Duo Security considers all resources to be external. That was a part of the reason we adopted it. That was the main difference between the Microsoft solution and this one. We've integrated it with single sign-on. It's good.

It's a good product. We've been pleased with it. There are no complaints.

I'd rate it a ten out of ten because I don't know what's better than this.

We use Duo Security for authentication for all of our SaaS applications. We also use it for RADIUS authentication.

Duo Security makes logging into all our applications easy with one stop for all our activity there. We use Cisco across the board for networking, and we love Cisco.

Since Duo Security provides a single place to log in for our SaaS applications, we don't have to manage user accounts and remember passwords for each specific application.

Duo Security should better organize its tile feature to organize applications better.

We have been using Duo Security for about three years.

Duo Security's stability is good, and we haven't had any issues.

Duo Security's scalability is good. We are a fairly large organization but haven't had any scalability issues.

Duo Security's technical support is great. They do a better job on the Duo side than on the networking side for support.

Positive

We've used Okta in the past. Okta has a really good auto-login feature. Duo Security can do the same thing, but Okta might do it a little bit better. It just automatically logs in if it's part of your profile.

We switched to Duo Security because of our relationship with our account reps.

We have seen a return on investment using Duo Security because it saves time.

Duo Security's pricing is good, fair, and very comparable to today's market.

Duo Security Self-Service Portal has significantly helped free up our IT staff for other projects. Instead of managing thousands of accounts across hundreds of SaaS applications, it's all in one spot now. Duo Security has probably saved us four or five hours at least.

I think Duo Security does a great job of establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from.

It is very important for our organization that the solution considers all resources to be external because it frames the activity as zero trust, and that's how we run our network to zero trust across the board. So when you treat all resources as external, we want to lock them down every time and not just have random passwords floating everywhere.

Duo Security will significantly simplify the life of someone who wants to improve cybersecurity in their organization, and they should definitely try it.

Overall, I rate Duo Security ten out of ten.

We use Duo Security for multi-factor authentication.

Duo Security helps with multi-factor authentication. It gives another level of security for authentication and logging devices. It's just more secure.

It does a very good job of securing our infrastructure. It enables us to be more secure and provides another level for our users and admins.

It definitely increases security in our work environment. I've also used it at school for logging into my system there. It's good for both scenarios. It's very user-friendly.

It's very good for user authentication and device verification for helping to prevent identity-based attacks. The only thing would be if you lose your phone or something like that, then it breaks the whole setup, so it has been very successful in that.

Now that it has been implemented, it has freed up our IT staff's time. It has mostly been set up and go. We then forget about it till we have to update it.

It's very good for establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from.

Duo Security considers all resources to be external which is an important aspect because of the way our network is set up. We've remote sites, and everyone at those sites also has the requirement to use Duo Security.

It's another level of the security level mechanism that we have. At this point, the way cybersecurity is going, adding more options that are not very heavy lifting for a user is very important.

The flexibility is the most valuable feature. We use it for the app on the phone. When we're at different locations, the phone is usually there, so we can use that. It has just been a very flexible option.

For upgrades, there should be a better notification of when they're coming out. We always have a testing phase, so we need to be ahead of it. It takes us longer before we can upgrade to the newest version.

I've known Duo Security for four years.

Their support is great. We use them a lot. It depends on what issues we're having, but we always get any service, so I'd rate them a ten out of ten. They're very responsive and very knowledgeable. They're more eager at points to get things figured out than we're ready to, which is good, but we have to step back.

Positive

We didn't use any other solution before. Its integration with the rest of our products probably made us go for it.

Its deployment is easy, but getting users bought in and starting to use it could be a bit difficult. That comes with any big change.

Our organization has definitely got a good return on investment on it.

I haven't seen it in a while, but it's at par with everything else licensing-wise.

Overall, I'd rate Duo Security a ten out of ten.

We use it for multifactor authentication for getting in with cell phones and PCs.

Duo Security allows us to be remote, and it keeps us secure. It has been very good for securing our infrastructure from end to end. We haven't had any issues.

It has helped free up our IT staff, but I don't have the metrics on how much time it has actually saved. We don't worry about it. It just works.

It has been good for establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from.

We're working remotely. It helps us keep people more safe. Its adoption has been fine. I like the fact that you can bypass it if you need to because there are situations where the internet doesn't work, etc.

Its ability to help reduce the risk of breaches is pretty good. I like its ability for user authentication and device verification.

We use Yubikey for pushing it to the phones. Yubikeys can get expensive because people tend to lose those for some reason. Fifty dollars a device is pretty high.

I've been using this solution for a couple of years.

I don't deal directly with their tech support myself. I've got some other folks that do that for me, but I don't hear any complaints, so I'd rate them really high.

We did use another solution. I can't remember the name of it, but it had a lot of flaws and a lot of issues. It did not connect to the equipment that we had to use. It would break down, so we had to find something else.

We didn't consider another solution. While researching, Duo Security came out to be the best. The last one was terrible, and this one ranked a lot higher.

We have a hybrid deployment. It was very easy to implement it. 

It integrates well with other systems. We have Cisco Umbrella and Cisco routing and switching. We had Cisco firewalls, but I wouldn't recommend them. 

We've seen an ROI in using this product. There is stability and ease of use. It isn't a problem to handle. It's simple to deal with.

It falls in line with everything else.

To someone researching this solution who wants to improve cybersecurity in their organization, I'd say that it has been very beneficial.

Overall, I'd rate Duo Security a ten out of ten.

We use a number of Cisco products specifically, Cisco Umbrella and Duo.

Our primary use case is to enhance our client's security and their digital security model; Secure DNS, malware protection, MFA, and MDM services for their premium devices and their office devices.

Cisco has improved our organization by making the attack vector smaller and improving the security of our customer's networks and by extension, enhancing our reputation.

Using Cisco has saved us time and money. It also saves us from the threat of a loss of money by cyberattacks. It saves us months of technical effort and loss of billable hours.

It has also helped to reduce our operating expenditures.

Multifactor authentication and secure two-factor authentication are the most valuable features. It's been around for a while, but now it's becoming an enforced behavior as opposed to something that you used to do as optional. 

When it comes to securing infrastructure from end to end so that we can detect and remediate it, it's pretty good. It's a little proprietary. A lot of it is based around its own ecosystem and we've started looking at other solutions that are more open-source or a bit open to more collaboration. That's something that we're picking up with Cisco.

I have been using Cisco solutions for two to three years. 

Their support is very good, especially at an executive level and account director level. They'll always find you the right person if they're not the right person to help you do something.

Positive

My own company and our customers have seen ROI from using Cisco. The customer specifically does not lose time anymore in cyberattacks, malware, and devices being affected or hijacked.

I'm not a big fan of relicensing products every year or two years, but that's the model at the moment. I prefer to go back to licensing perpetually or permanent licensing.

We chose Cisco because it's very good, very well understood, has a good reputation, and has a strong support community around it. There is good technical expertise if you need it.

I would rate Cisco an eight out of ten. 

We use Duo, Client, and Umbrella. 

Our primary use case for this is for our clients to be secure.

We are at the beginning of using Umbrella. We use a traditional Cisco proxy. Now, with Umbrella, it's easy to administrate. It helps save us time.

Everything is all in one dashboard, so it makes the administration very easy.

Cisco Secure solutions are great for detecting and remediating threats across our infrastructure from end to end. The integration of Talos in SecureX is great. Everything is clear in one dashboard. You have your dashboard and can have one look in your dashboard and see everything. It's on one pane of glass. 

Smart Licensing needs improvement. It's terrible. We have problems with it every year and we need to involve support to fix it. 

Our appliances are connected to Cisco Smart Center but they don't get the license. That's our pain point. But then when they work, they work. 

I liked the traditional licensing. We get the license key, pass it, and it works.

We have been using Umbrella for one month and we just started using Duo. We have been using classic Cisco for seven years. 

The support is fast and good.

The first level of support asks a lot of questions. We have a partner who does it for us. If we have a problem, we send it to them and they contact Cisco.

For the first level of support, they always say it's the firewall or the network and we need to prove that it isn't. It's too much back and forth. It's a lot of emails. Maybe it's faster when it's on a call. 

Positive

Cisco Duo was really easy to implement. 

Umbrella was a little bit difficult because of the documentation. Not everything was documented. We got help from Cisco and the internet. 

We used a Cisco consultant for the implementation. They were great. They know nearly everything. For Cisco deployment, they need to know our network, how it works, and so it's not so easy for them, but they did great. When I have questions, I get answers.

Cisco isn't cheap but it's good. 

Cisco DNA Center is great, but it's too big for our environment, we don't need it in our company. Before we had classic Cisco infrastructure, now, we are switching to Meraki because it's cheaper and it's not big like DNA Center. DNA Center is great, but it's too big. You need a lot of IT to get it to work. 

We also evaluated Unify. Cisco is the leader and we started with Cisco. It's good, so we stay with it.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. It's not like Cisco Duo. Not everything is on one application. It should be easier to get everything in one application, where you can see everything. I would like to see one pane of glass so that we can plug everything into one application in order to see the performance.

The support should also be improved.

We use Cisco Firewalls, Cisco Umbrella, and we played a bit with Cisco Duo. The integration between has gotten better recently.

We use them for a security solution, multifactor authentication, and DNS protection.

It helps increase the security posture of the organization.

Cisco saves us time. We automate as many tasks as possible.

The integration is the most valuable feature. The products talk to each other. 

The products help us to detect and remediate threats.

The integration has improved recently but it can still be better. 

We were considering purchasing other products, like AMP for Endpoints, and it was not properly integrated with the firewall function. It might be better now with SecureX.

My company has been using it since before the company was founded more than ten years ago.

Their support can use improvement when it comes to responsiveness. It can take a few business days to convince an engineer that a device is faulty. 

Neutral

We also use other products from other companies for web applications and firewalling, besides Firepower. There are pluses and minuses for the other companies. 

From Gartner's perspective, Cisco products are not market leaders in some areas. 

With good specialists and support, it's easy to implement multiple Cisco products. 

We should be protecting our network and the cost of security and the OpEx is important, but it is more important to have a protected network.

I would rate their security products an eight out of ten.

It's an MFA solution, and we mainly use Duo Security for secure access to some of the servers with backup data.

With Duo Security, we can better secure our servers with backup data. It's very good for our customers for cyber resilience.

It can reduce time in case of a ransomware attack and so on. It protects the data but not directly.

For me and my customers, the best feature is that it's very easy to integrate with the existing infrastructure. It takes a few minutes to configure it.

It's already good, but there could be more integration. There could be ready-made integration. Other than that, it's a good product. It already integrates with lots of products, but it can integrate with more products. There should be easy integration with Cisco products because sometimes, it can be quite complicated.

I've been using this solution for around two years.

I don't see any problems. It's very good.

It seems good.

We already have a different vendor's solution, but the way that Cisco works on global security helps us to sell more. That's because customers want one dashboard or one cockpit, and now, all the Cisco projects go through SecureX. For customers, it's an advantage because they only have to know one interface, not ten interfaces. They don't have to know the interface of each product they've got.

I like Cisco Talos because it's a good source of security information, but it doesn't impact the customers as such.

We mainly work with the public sector, so its deployment is mainly on-premises, but we also have a few customers who have a hybrid setup. We don't have customers with a full public cloud, so it's mainly hybrid, and they mainly use AWS and Azure cloud. There is also one local provider called OVH, and because it's in the country, it's easier. 

I don't take care of its deployment. I have a presales role, so I do demonstrations. I deploy it in our lab but not at the customer. It's my colleague who does that.

The deployment process in the lab is very easy. Duo Security is a cloud solution, so there is almost nothing to install on-prem, and there is also lots of documentation. It's very well-documented how to integrate it with an already existing solution. In one day, you can integrate it quite easily. The web interface is very easy to understand.

One person is enough for its deployment. In terms of maintenance, it doesn't require any maintenance. It's a cloud solution.

The ROI is complicated to calculate. It improves security, and improved security is the return on investment.

Cisco's licensing is always a bit complicated to understand, but the price is fair. It could be more expensive than others, but the way they integrate everything, it has a fair price.

You've got a trial version, so just try it, and you will adopt it.

I'd rate Duo Security a nine out of ten.