We compared Duo Security and Cato Networks across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Based on the reviews, Duo Security is commended for its user-friendly setup process and extensive documentation. It offers valuable features like two-factor authentication, easy management, and integration capabilities. However, there are areas that need improvement, such as compatibility, user-specific permissions, technical support, and device insights. The pricing is fair and competitive, with positive ROI and satisfactory customer service. On the other hand, Cato Networks also has a straightforward setup process, but it lacks some security measures and advanced networking features. The pricing is considered expensive but profitable, with positive ROI and generally good customer support.
"The product is efficient and easy to use."
"The solution is a simple WAN solution. We've onboarded the socket on the Cato platform, and it provides connectivity. There is no complex routing."
"The WAN aggregation feature is the most valuable."
"I haven't had any trouble, and practically forget that I'm using it."
"The most valuable feature is that it also works as a next-gen firewall because it has security features."
"The most valuable feature of Cato Networks is the CASB and the documentation is useful."
"It's a pretty straightforward solution."
"The scalability is quite good."
"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."
"The administrator tool in the dashboard is the most valuable feature. It's really easy to quickly see if users are locked out from their device, firmware code, or just all the little dashboards and reports I can run to give the security for monthly reports. The dashboard's really good."
"It's simple. It's reliable. I haven't had any issues with it."
"The two-factor login is great. I receive a message and just have to press okay."
"It's a lot easier for our end users to connect to our network. You don't have to type in a code. You get push notifications, that's probably the best thing about it. The fewer clicks they have to do to be online, the better it is. They can easily get into the network and do remote work."
"Regarding the valuable features, I would say that Duo Security is easy to use, has speed, and is dependable."
"Duo Security gives us an additional layer of security that would give us added confidence that our network will be less likely to get hacked, compromised, or otherwise."
"It meets our security needs very well. It is easy to use, and documentation is also available. It is also very stable and scalable, and its support is also very good. We are satisfied with this solution."
"Web application firewalling (WAF) is a feature we would like to have in this solution and does not exist yet."
"The solution could be made more user friendly for the administrator to use the portal. It is difficult to use it for people who are not experienced with Cato Networks."
"They should include a web application firewall feature in the solution."
"Cato Networks could improve their intrusion detection. There is not a lot in place."
"The different languages in the user interface should be enhanced."
"I would like to see better integration with identity providers."
"We would like the product to continue to improve its security."
"I am located in South Korea, and I can say that most people here have no idea about Cato Networks. I think Cato Networks should promote its network services in various countries."
"Duo Security should better organize its tile feature to organize applications better."
"The only challenge is finding the right person sometimes. From what I've seen, being a named account is a big deal."
"We first deployed Duo Security for our company with the VPN, and afterward, about a year later, we implemented it for a customer of ours where we offered infrastructure as a service. When I tried to establish a VPN connection through Duo Security, it did not function well on that version, which was the latest one at the time. So, I had to make a copy of the machine and then implement Duo Security with the VPN because it did not function well with the newer version."
"Most of my colleagues from other companies use the Microsoft MFA solution because it's included in Office 365. Few people are considering Cisco Duo. That's the primary problem in our area. It's a solution mostly adopted by Cisco users."
"For the back-end, there could be a few more security features applied."
"They could just continue to add more integrations."
"The new smart license model doesn't always work. It's very complicated."
"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."
Cato SASE Cloud Platform is ranked 4th in ZTNA as a Service with 21 reviews while Cisco Duo is ranked 3rd in ZTNA as a Service with 55 reviews. Cato SASE Cloud Platform is rated 8.8, while Cisco Duo is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cato SASE Cloud Platform writes "Useful remote worker VPN, centralized management, and simple on-boarding process". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Duo writes "Helps reduce the risk of a breach and is easy to deploy and onboard". Cato SASE Cloud Platform is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco SD-WAN, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet FortiGate and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Cisco Duo is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiToken, Yubico YubiKey and UserLock. See our Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs. Cisco Duo report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.