We performed a comparison between Cisco Duo and IBM Security Verify Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Duo Security are visibility and OTP authentication. The OTP is very important because it is a self-enrollment feature, you are able to enroll users very quickly with a shorter time period."
"Regarding the valuable features, I would say that Duo Security is easy to use, has speed, and is dependable."
"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."
"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."
"It is a good solution for hybrid environments and VPN."
"The single pane of glass management works very well. That feature is very important because we have a lot of admins who have to manage Duo, and it's much easier when it's a single pane of glass. That single pane is also great because it's easy to enroll new devices."
"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."
"Duo has allowed us to add an additional layer of security to our organization and to establish trust for every access request and secures our environment."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Security Access Manager, at least for my company, is multi-factor authentication. That's the only feature my company is using. The solution works well and has no glitches. IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."
"The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via email or SMS. This ensures secure access to your accounts by providing multiple authentication options."
"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth. For legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users. From the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"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."
"When you come to the push in Duo Security, there are some integrations where you have to use the code instead of the push functionality."
"The only time I really had some negative feedback for them was about the UI of their mobile app, but they improved it in the last version. It is good on the functionality side, but their pricing model is a little bit weird. Currently, there is no price advantage in signing up for yearly contracts. If you are on a monthly term or a yearly contract, you basically pay the same price, and that is very unusual. Normally, there is a discount when someone signs up for the 12-month system."
"The pain point for us at one point was the Duo Authentication Proxy since we're on-premises and not in the cloud. We had to have a proxy machine that's in our DMZ to talk to Duo for us. The configuration of that was a little complicated."
"Duo Security could be improved with the addition of more applications."
"Its documentation must be in French because we are a French-speaking country. They should also provide more training documentation. Its management interface should also be improved. They should also improve its update period. If I compare its update period with other products such as Palo Alto firewalls, this solution is really slow in updates."
"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."
"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."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"The solution could be classified as a hilt system. There are a lot of resources being used and it is suitable for very large enterprises or the public sector."
"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area. OIDC is a third-party integration that we do with the cloud platforms, and OAuth is an authorization mechanism for allowing a user having an account with Google or any other provider to access an application. Organizations these days are looking for just-in-time provisioning use cases, but IBM Security Access Manager is not very mature for such use cases. There are only a few applications that can be integrated, and this is where this product is lagging. However, in terms of configuration and single sign-on mechanisms, it is a great product."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"There are a lot of areas that can be improved, but the main area is the lack of customization. You cannot easily customize anything in the product. It is not easy to tweak the functionality. It is challenging to change the out-of-the-box functionality."
Cisco Duo is ranked 2nd in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 55 reviews while IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 14th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 7 reviews. Cisco Duo is rated 8.8, while IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Duo writes "Helps reduce the risk of a breach and is easy to deploy and onboard". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "Supports on-prem and cloud environments, has good integration capabilities, and is easy to adopt". Cisco Duo is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiToken, Yubico YubiKey and UserLock, whereas IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Workforce Identity, ForgeRock, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager. See our Cisco Duo vs. IBM Security Verify Access report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors.
We monitor all Single Sign-On (SSO) 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.
