Cisco Duo Reviews

We wanted multi-factor authentication across a variety of platforms.

It's improved security by enforcing strong, reliable multi-factor authentication, and it has reduced intrusions across our organization. It makes sure all the user sessions are at least a little more trustful than if we just had single-factor.

In terms of remediating threats, we are able to pick out unsuccessful login attempts pretty quickly on the Duo platform and we can shut down those accounts. It makes us more proactive. That works well.

The ability for users to authenticate via phone, from any random phone number, has been very helpful for managing a distributed workforce. Using it across a distributed network for securing access to our applications is big for us. It works very well, and we have no major complaints about the integration of any of our third-party applications.

We have a high level of confidence in the platform, especially for identifying potential logins from unexpected geolocations. The data associated with logs is very helpful for helping to make that determination.

It's very important for us that Duo Security considers all resources to be external, especially as we lead up to Zero Trust. It needs to be like that.

End-users find it more annoying than anything else. It's tough to manage user perception of the service, especially when there isn't feature parity between Mac and Windows users. There are some challenges in making that user experience the same between platforms and helping users feel the least amount of burden possible while helping to ensure the organization's security.

Network connectivity depends on where users are located. Internally, on-premises, it's not hard keeping connectivity, but we have users who move throughout the world, and their levels of connectivity change. It can be a challenge, if someone is in Bahrain, to authenticate via Duo.

I have been using Duo Security for two years. 

We've had no issues with the stability of Duo. I consider it to be a stable product.

It has scaled to meet our needs. I don't know how it scales if you have 10,000 or 20,000 users, but for our organization, with fewer than 5,000 users, it's been fine.

The technical support has been adequate. They are responsive regarding support for troubleshooting tickets. We haven't had any issues that required escalation, so we've been happy with it.

We did have a previous solution. The interoperability has been improved with Duo compared to that solution.

Our physical deployment of the solution is in the continental United States, but our users are worldwide.

I don't place too much value on any single product, since placing too much trust in one thing creates a single point of failure. This is just a single piece in a broader spectrum of security products to accomplish our actual goals.

Building resilience is nice, but there's a point of diminishing returns when it comes to doing that. Part of my job is to help our leaders understand where that diminishing return is.

The single pane of glass management is desirable, but it's like a unicorn. No single pane of glass is ever really a single pane of glass. That's something that would be nice, but it's not something I expect.

Duo is a very consistent product and flexible in how it can be deployed and has good support. It's a product we're very happy with.

We use it for MFA to secure our Outlook webmail and some other applications as well. We use Duo for pretty much anything that uses MFA. 

We were looking for increased security. We wanted to make sure that the person who is trying to log in to our services is actually who they claim to be. We wanted to lock down our applications more and provide extra security.

We have some on-prem servers for the gateways and it's in the cloud as well.

It has definitely made our company more secure. It's pretty easy to incorporate into any sort of application you want to. We also use it for single sign-on for certain applications and that has been nice. People hate passwords.

It's really great for remote workers and a hybrid workforce nowadays, for people who are trying to access their VPN or any applications from outside of the company. It helps us make sure it's someone who should be accessing those things. It does a good job.

It's definitely a factor in achieving that Zero Trust.

In a way, it helps us remediate threats more quickly. If someone is trying a brute-force attack, trying all the passwords they can, and they're not getting a response through Duo, you can see certain security threats that are happening and remediate them.

Duo has also had a big impact on employee morale. People like it. They feel that their data is more secure. Resiliency is very key to keeping people doing their jobs. Cyber security resilience has been very important for us. It used to be that security was not to be the main focus, but it's extremely important now. There are a lot of ransomware attacks and people need to be very cognizant of that. It's important to have redundant and resilient systems in place to support that.

It's nice to have that push notification with the app and it's pretty easy to use. Our users are usually pretty open to it, and it's pretty easy to onboard people.

It also seems like it's accurate, and you can add multiple devices to your account.

In addition, typically, if it detects that you're on an internal network, you can bypass the Duo portion of it. That way, people don't have to do MFA when they're on campus.

Another feature is the single pane of glass management. That's important for analytics and also for troubleshooting. It means there's one place that you go to at least start the troubleshooting process. It also helps with the user experience because you can manage all the user accounts from that one spot, including setting up new users, making adjustments, editing their preferences, et cetera.

It could be a little bit more intuitive when it comes to the sign-up process. I know they send out an email, but sometimes our users get a little confused. It could be an end-user problem, but Cisco could work on that a little.

I've been using Duo Security for about two years.

It seems very stable. I don't think there has been any point at which people have tried to use it and it has failed.

The scalability seems fine. As long as you get the licensing to support it, you can add as many users as you'd like.

We have five or six offices locally, and a few more in different states in the US. We also have one in Shanghai, but they're doing their own thing there. But everyone in our US offices uses it, they all get enrolled. Typically, people will install the app on their phones although they don't have to.

I don't think we've had to use technical support too often, which is a good thing about the product itself.

We didn't use an MFA before Duo.

When the solution was rolled out, I wasn't with the company, but we then expanded it in different ways and I have been involved in that. In terms of the initial deployment, from what I can tell, it was relatively straightforward. And from what I've seen since, it hasn't been too hard to expand it to other services.

It's definitely a valuable product to have.

We may have evaluated other options at a surface level, but we didn't really go too deeply into them. We pretty much went with Duo out the gate.

I would tell leaders who want to build more resilience within their organization to do it right now. It's definitely important and there are a lot of resources out there that can help them on that path. Duo helps with that.

It does what it's marketed to do.

Essentially, we use it as a two-factor authentication for our users when they are trying to log into the corporate network or another dev network that we have.

Overall, it provides functionality and security with the two-factor authentication. We can ensure whomever is logging in isn't someone else who might be sharing a username or password.

It is a good source of security as far as ensuring that there are no rogue agents attempting to access the network. Duo has enabled us to mitigate rogue access requests to our network.

With everything that went on over the past three years, we can authenticate through the VPN, or anywhere that you are at, giving our workers the ability to work hybridly and tackle day-to-day jobs without having to come into the office.

Our workers know what they are doing is secure. They don't have to worry about buying other equipment and we don't have to worry about supplying other equipment. We can just use Duo to facilitate, making it easier to do their day-to-day jobs.

The ability to work online and offline with two-factor authentication is the best feature. Usually, with products, you have two different tokens. For this product, there is just one. 

It is a good product to assess the access. Overall, it has a timely response as far as when you need to click. It is very interactive. It is not like you have three seconds, then it is gone. It gives you the time to do it.

It provides single-pane-of-glass management, which is pretty easy and straightforward. Because we manage multiple access tiers, it allows us to essentially manage everything from one viewpoint and not have many viewpoints for the same product. This is important because it is a time and resource saver. It also saves us money.

The single-pane-of-glass management user experience is pretty good. It is one of the best ones that I have worked with so far.

The biggest challenge is integrating it into all our end user utilities. We use it for other networks, not just our personal network. So, the challenge is just integrating it across the board.

There is not much improvement as far as the front-facing part of it. For the back-end, there could be a few more security features applied. Obviously, as they grow, it will get better.

I have been using it for about seven months.

The stability works well with what we have, and we have a big Cisco infrastructure. It is pretty seamless for us.

Maintaining network connectivity with Duo is pretty easy. The timeout isn't too bad. It obviously depends on your security thresholds, but it is pretty easy.

It is pretty scalable. We have run it through its paces.

I haven't had to work with their technical support division. I am guessing it is good since I haven't had to deal too much with them.

This is the first time that I have worked in a VPN environment.

I would give it about a nine out of 10 because nothing is perfect.

Our web developers use Duo Security as a WordPress plugin to provide security for our websites.

Duo offers dual-factor authentication for our logins. I put in my credentials and hit go. Then I get an alert on my Apple watch, and I approve it. That part is just phenomenal. 

Duo has some issues that we're trying to work through. For example, if I install it on a WordPress site and another admin needs to log in, they can't because Duo hasn't been set up for them. It doesn't appear that I can add permissions on a user-by-user basis. It's not obvious.  

I would also like to see password-free login. There used to be a password-free product where you used your phone and looked at the screen. I can't remember what it's called now, but it was great. It used blue wavy lines that constantly changed, so nobody could ever screen capture and use them to log in. That was by far the best solution. 

Duo bought them out and did away with them. They probably saw it as a threat because it was a better solution. And a couple of companies have tried to mimic that, but they have never come close. If Duo were to go back to something like that, I would be ecstatic. Passwords are supposed to be a thing of the past.

I've used Duo Security for about two years.

Duo Security is stable.

I don't know how Duo would scale. If I've got a hundred websites and I install it on several of them, scalability just means adding it to a new website. It would be as easy as adding it to the first. 

That's not an issue, but I  still haven't figured out how to add new users to a site that already has it installed. I checked their online documentation and haven't found an answer yet,  so we temporarily took it off on that particular site.

We tried several authentication solutions before, but I liked the way Duo works better. 

I rate Duo Security eight out of 10 for ease of deployment. It takes a minute or two to download and install the plugin. 

Duo Security is free.

I rate Duo Security nine out of 10. Duo is a solid solution, but it still has some minor issues with adding users. 

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.