Cisco Duo Reviews

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.

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 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.

Duo is part of a complete security package that Cisco provides. Initially, we only used Duo to secure Microsoft 365, but we now use it for other applications like VPN, terminal server access, etc.

A couple of months ago, our colleagues got phishing emails from real accounts because other companies got hacked. The scammers write emails from a hacked account because they see an employee on the contact list. They seem real because the images are authentic. That leads to a portal where you have to insert your credentials. 

Like any MFA, Cisco Duo sends a message when someone tries to access your account. That's the part that helped us because a person always falls for it. Unauthorized access is a serious problem, even if it doesn't affect your files. It's a potential risk to our reputation because it doesn't look good if a hacker is using your company email address to send spam.

I'm not sure if Duo saved us time. Any security measure inevitably makes things more complicated. If you eliminate security solutions, it's easier on your users, but you have no security. It's like wearing a helmet on a motorcycle. You don't need it until you fall. 

Our security posture is getting better, but we still have room for improvement. We're implementing several security packages currently and hope to be where we want to be by the end of this year. 

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.

We are new users and only started transitioning to Cisco last year.

We haven't experienced any issues so far, and I hope it stays that way. Nothing is 100 percent, but it's close to that. 

Our company isn't too big. Cisco is the perfect product for our current size, and I don't think we'll have problems with scalability as we grow.

We rely on our partner for technical support, so we've never contacted Cisco for that. 

We used HP networking and security products but transitioned to Cisco last year. In the food manufacturing industry, Cisco has some advantages over others. For example, Cisco switches are made for heavy industry and are designed for devices in the mills. Cisco is certified to integrate with Siemens microprocessors. 

What is critical for me isn't the product itself, it's your partner. If you have a great partner, you can also work with HP or other competitors. Having a partner to implement everything and suggest best practices is essential. Our partner NTS works exclusively with Cisco, so we switched from the competitor to Cisco when we switched partners.

The deployment was straightforward with the help of our partner. I can't do it all alone, but our partner has 450 Cisco-certified technicians. 

Cisco has the most expensive products because market leaders tend to charge a lot.

I rate Cisco Duo Security a nine out of ten. I would give the solution a perfect score if it were a little cheaper. Cisco is expensive.

We are still implementing the solution and are not in full production mode yet. We implemented Duo Security in comparison with ICE, and we use it to secure our environments. It helps us authenticate users that use our network devices.

We hope to increase our security posture with Duo Security.

I like the set time that users can log into devices during the day and how many times they can do so. I also like the ability to restrict the regions from which the user can get in. Users outside of our country or even the town cannot log in.

I would like to see Duo Security increase the time that the users have to log into the devices. The maximum time interval is 15 minutes at the moment, and I would like it to be 60 minutes.

When you try to log into a device and have to authenticate yourself, sometimes it's not very pleasant. It's not the best thing particularly if you have to do this every 15 minutes, which is the maximum time that Duo gives. This makes it difficult to use and does not save time.

I've been working with Duo Security for six months.

So far, we haven't had any issues with stability.

My experience with technical support has been generally good, but sometimes, there is a delay in getting answers. I would rate them at eight on a scale from one to ten.

Positive

Duo Security was easy to set up. It took us almost a week to read the manual and understand what we have to implement to go into production.

Duo Security is very helpful and fits what we were looking for to satisfy the requirements of our security office. On a scale from one to ten, with ten being the best, I would rate Duo Security at eight.

We were really looking for two-factor authentication to secure our applications. We are basically looking for it to reduce risk.

I am in the retail space at a company with more than 2,500 employees.

It is SaaS. For VPN, we have our on-prem RADIUS servers, and there is an agent on our servers for RDP.

I definitely had some places where employees had password breaches in other locations, and it saved us there.

It has definitely decreased our security risk.

It does a really good job of helping workers feel safe, secure, supported, and included. In the beginning, it was new to everybody, so there was a little bit of friction with the onboarding. However, after everybody got used to it, they were quickly able to run with it and had very few problems using it. This has definitely been important for us. 

Duo has helped us remediate threats more quickly by having one spot to look at. We can see whether a user authenticated it from somewhere or if they were denied a two-factor request.

The most valuable feature is just the ease of use. Out-of-the-box, there are so many integrations that are really easy to set up and use in a matter of minutes, depending on what the application is.

It establishes trust with every integration or any sort of application that you are using, whether it is VPNs, Azure AD, or remote desktop.

Duo provides single-pane-of-glass management. This is pretty important, especially if you are trying to respond to a security event. You don't want to look at different places and potentially forget to look at one spot. Now, we can have all our logs in one spot.

The single-pane-of-glass management does a really good job of optimizing the user experience, especially with the updates that they provide. They really take in customer feedback. I have been on several customer feedback panels before, and they do surveys. They are constantly improving the product.

They could just continue to add more integrations.

I have been using it for about seven years, since 2015.

It is pretty stable. They are really proactive. So, if there is an issue with a certain cloud instance or feature, they are proactive. They email you and tell you what is going on, sending updates. Stability-wise, we have hardly had any issues using them. It hasn't affected our production at all.

Maintenance is minimal. There are some agent updates that you need to do every now and then, but for the cloud stuff, that is all taken care of.

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.

I have only had to use them a couple of times. Every time, support was pretty easy to use. I would rate them as nine out of 10.

Positive

We previously didn't have any sort of two-factor authentication. We were just looking for more security so people wouldn't be reusing passwords or have data breaches. 

Earlier, we had solutions in the cloud and on-prem. So, it just helps having it in one spot. We can make sure any applications that we are using have been secured.

The deployment took two months. We did a proof of concept, which didn't include that time. That time was just for the first application that we did, which was about two months. Then, as we grew into it, we added more applications so time was added as well.

We have seen ROI, but I wouldn't know what that metric would be. I don't have an off-hand, hard metric for that. It is for the unseen risk, and how do you measure an unseen risk?

It definitely offers resiliency. If you are managing all your applications in one location, you can lock people out of it. So, it is just a fast way to remediate any sort of security issues. It has been important for reducing all the risk that comes with users having access to internal applications or cloud applications.

It has a fair pricing model. I know they have different tiers, but it would be nice to have different types of licenses for certain groups of users in our organization. That way, we wouldn't have to lump everybody into one group. That would be also one complaint.

We did evaluate other options. Since it was so long ago, I can't remember which other ones we looked at, but I do remember they were not as easy to implement.

We chose Duo Security for its ease of implementation and the number of applications that they are integrated with.

Definitely take the end user process or perspective into account when trying to choose something. I feel like that will make or break a product.

We did VPN. Network connectivity was a requirement for VPN. In that regard, it would be easy.

I would rate it as nine out of 10.