We performed a comparison between Duo Security and Microsoft Authenticator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Authentication Systems 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."
"It was a simple way of providing two-factor authentication for remote access when we hit the COVID pandemic. It was very easy and quick to get it going."
"We like the different ways that it allows you to push notifications to people. It can do text, a phone call, and email. We liked the versatility for all of our different end-users, regardless of their level of understanding of the technology."
"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."
"It is really scalable. It is easy once you get an application in. You can import users from Active Directory and enroll users really fast."
"The app has greater stability than rival solutions such as Google Authenticator, and Duo Push authentication is a valuable feature."
"Duo Security improved my organization by helping us secure all access points within the company infrastructure."
"The single pane of glass management is very important and it is part of the reason we went with Duo. Anything we can do to save time for our administrators, help desk staff, and engineers, is valuable to us."
"The solution adds an extra layer of security."
"The two-factor authentication provides an additional layer of security for our organizational data, so Microsoft Authenticator plays a crucial role in making our confidential data more secure."
"What I like about Microsoft Authenticator is that it has good features. I also like that the tool is straightforward to use. Microsoft Authenticator also has a good UI that's very simple to use. I also like that I didn't find any limitations or negative aspects from the features of the tool because Microsoft Authenticator is not an extensive application. It has a two-factor based authentication which validates the user through the password, then it approves authentication."
"We have a history of all our authentications and excellent integration with the Microsoft solutions we use at our company. It runs smoothly in Windows and macOS."
"It enhances security, especially for unregistered devices. It 1000% has security features that help to improve our security posture. It could be irritating at times, but improving the security posture is exactly what the Authenticator app does."
"I like the downloads, availability for Android and iOS operating systems, and integration with Microsoft applications, such as Azure- and Office-based solutions. It is an excellent tool that helps with day-to-day business operations. I also like that I can install the app on my mobile."
"The solution is free to use and you can use it for every service."
"Being able to easily authenticate yourself on the MSA app is valuable. It is easy to use. Rather than receiving a code in an SMS, you can just verify that it is you. You don't have to punch in any password or any six-digit code. That's the feature that I like the most."
"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."
"Integration with a product such as Microsoft Sentinel would be great. As the product continually improves, I'm unsure if this feature is available."
"Integration between Duo Security and FTDs needs improvement. Integrating Next Generation Firewall safety with Duo Security currently requires a proxy agent between Active Directory and the appliance. It's an additional factor that we need to think about. It would be great to have direct integration with FTD so that we don't have to worry about middleware products. For the rest of the Cisco Secure solutions, the APIs need improvement."
"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."
"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."
"More automation and device insights would be helpful in achieving a seamless single pane of glass. Having the additional capability to streamline processes would also make things 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."
"Smart Licensing needs improvement. It's terrible. We have problems with it every year and we need to involve support to fix it."
"Sometimes, the notifications and alerts are not delivered properly, and we end up missing them. Also, the overall graphical user interface needs to be improved."
"Lacks integration between applications and phones."
"The pricing is okay, however, it could always be better in the future."
"Adding a new account can be tricky."
"For the end users, it can be confusing if they have worked for another company that had the Authenticator app. It is tricky if they have already had the Authenticator app and then work somewhere else. If they have to download it again and use it again on their phone, it is something that gets complicated. I know how to get through it. They just need to uninstall and reinstall the application, but for them, sometimes, it is confusing."
"It would be an improvement if Authenticator made it easier to recover the app if you reboot your cellphone and lose access."
"I believe it can also be integrated into other Microsoft products, as well as more integrations with other solutions."
"They can improve how people manage their accounts. They can simplify and provide more information about adding or updating a phone number or email id in the MSA account. A lot of time users do get confused about where to go. For example, if I've changed my mobile number, where do I go and change my mobile number in the MSA account? A lot of time, employees think if they change the phone number in the HR database, it'll automatically get changed on the MSA account, which is not the case. Microsoft can simplify that and add these questions in the FAQ documents as well."
Duo Security is ranked 2nd in Authentication Systems with 28 reviews while Microsoft Authenticator is ranked 1st in Authentication Systems with 11 reviews. Duo Security is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Authenticator is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Duo Security writes "Integrates with tons of applications, works seamlessly, and comes with excellent documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Authenticator writes "Provides easy authentication and high security and works absolutely fine even when you switch organizations". Duo Security is most compared with Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiToken, Yubico YubiKey, UserLock and Zscaler Private Access, whereas Microsoft Authenticator is most compared with Yubico YubiKey, RSA SecurID Access, Fortinet FortiToken, Symantec VIP Access Manager and PingID. See our Duo Security vs. Microsoft Authenticator report.
See our list of best Authentication Systems vendors.
We monitor all Authentication Systems 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.
