Cisco Duo Reviews

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.

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.

Duo specifically offers good MFA functionality. We needed support for our VPN and used GlobalProtect as well as Duo for additional security.

Duo has allowed us to add an additional layer of security to our organization. It prevents people from gaining access unless they have your credentials as well as a device. It has allowed us to establish trust for every access request and secures our environment. We are confident and comfortable with the way the solution handles this. We have tried other solutions but they've not met our expectations.  

Duo Security does a good job of helping to support our organization across a distributed network. It does a fantastic job at securing access to applications and networks. It is streamlined and straightforward.

Duo Security provides single-pane-of-glass management.

This solution has been most valuable for locking up our VPN solution and providing secure web protection. 

We have a 24 hour timer for our Duo cookie and we would like to reduce this to a shorter time when using Duo. We use Duo together with GlobalProtect and I am not sure which solution would be responsible for this improvement. 

I have been using Duo Security for the entire time I've been employed at my company.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. We have 20,000 users covered by this solution. 

We have not needed much help from the Duo support team. Using this solution has been surprisingly easy for us. 

We were running a different solution on a test gateway we had and it didn't meet our expectations so we moved to Duo. We have previously tested XAML. 

You pay per user when using this solution and the pricing is fair.

We have never had an issue in maintaining network connectivity across all workplaces. Duo Security has helped remediate threats more quickly and offers security end to end. Cybersecurity resilience is probably one of the most significant elements of organization because we work in the healthcare industry.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. This is because we have not had any vulnerability that has been exposed to or any other issues that we've had to deal with.

We mostly use it for multi-factor authentication with email platforms like Office 365 as well as other apps.

We were looking to deal with email phishing attacks and brute force attacks, and the like, and Duo has helped a lot. We're more secure with multi-factor and have seen the number of phishing attacks and brute force attacks go down.

Logging in with Duo is baked into anything that we log into, including any applications, email, and web apps. We integrate it with a product called Jump Cloud, which is our cloud-based identity management system. We have also integrated it into WebEx and Box. Duo runs all of our security and MFA, and it's worked out well.

It's helped a lot of our customers with multi-factor in their identity management systems, on-prem and in the cloud. That way, when users log in, they get the MFAs to be able to log in to any resource on the network.

And because everybody is working remotely now, Duo checks all the boxes for hybrid work.

When it comes to remediating threats, it has helped us do so quickly. We don't even see a lot of the threats anymore because it's working behind the scenes. It has definitely decreased the number of threats in the last year compared to what we used to see.

The ease of use and the ease of management of all the users have been key for us. The setting up of devices in Duo has been really easy as well. It's better than all the other ones I've worked with.

Another important feature is that Duo considers all resources to be external because even the internal ones look like external ones, and people click on stuff and get caught. It's very important to be more cautious than ever.

Also, 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.

One area that might be improved is that setting up SMS texting is not as easy as using the app, even though it does support it.

Also, a faster management user interface would help. It tends to lag a little bit.

I've been using Duo Security for three or four years.

It has been stable. We haven't really had many issues with it. It maintains network connectivity across all workplaces and works great. I don't have any complaints.

It can scale to as many employees as you have. It can go from five employees to 1,000 employees. I don't see any issues with the scalability.

Their technical support is great.

Positive

We did not have a previous solution.

The initial deployment was pretty straightforward. We had a small number of challenges, but nothing we couldn't get by. It was pretty smooth, overall. Setting it up and enrolling new devices into the environment was a breeze. That was the easiest thing.

We do it ourselves.

We see ROI in that users feel more secure and their morale goes up. You get to keep those employees a lot longer if they feel better working for an organization that's investing in security. A big benefit is keeping your employees.

Everybody loves it. They feel a sense of security when they get that prompt to send them a text, or an email. It makes them feel like they're working for a company that is really taking the time to secure the environment. It gives them a good feeling when they get a second form of authorization.

The pricing is pretty competitive. It's pretty cheap. Anybody can adopt it. We don't have customers that haven't used it because of the price.

We evaluated Microsoft Authenticator and Google Authenticator. With those solutions, you don't have the granularity of management of the MFA environment that Duo offers.

Our Duo is all cloud-based, there's nothing on-prem. We typically integrate it with our cloud apps.

Resilience in cyber security is a game-changer. We have the same challenges that every organization goes through with security: phishing attacks, ransomware attacks, et cetera. I wouldn't say it has eliminated 100 percent of them, but it definitely cuts a lot of that stuff out. Every organization should have something like Duo, or MFA in general. But if they're going to do it, they should do it with Duo just because it's so easy to manage and it is resilient.

For management that wants to build more resilience within their organization, they have to implement multi-factor authentication across that organization for everything. It shouldn't just be for email but everything internally as well.