Cisco Duo Reviews

We use Duo Security for multi-factor authentication.

Duo Security helps with multi-factor authentication. It gives another level of security for authentication and logging devices. It's just more secure.

It does a very good job of securing our infrastructure. It enables us to be more secure and provides another level for our users and admins.

It definitely increases security in our work environment. I've also used it at school for logging into my system there. It's good for both scenarios. It's very user-friendly.

It's very good for user authentication and device verification for helping to prevent identity-based attacks. The only thing would be if you lose your phone or something like that, then it breaks the whole setup, so it has been very successful in that.

Now that it has been implemented, it has freed up our IT staff's time. It has mostly been set up and go. We then forget about it till we have to update it.

It's very good for establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from.

Duo Security considers all resources to be external which is an important aspect because of the way our network is set up. We've remote sites, and everyone at those sites also has the requirement to use Duo Security.

It's another level of the security level mechanism that we have. At this point, the way cybersecurity is going, adding more options that are not very heavy lifting for a user is very important.

The flexibility is the most valuable feature. We use it for the app on the phone. When we're at different locations, the phone is usually there, so we can use that. It has just been a very flexible option.

For upgrades, there should be a better notification of when they're coming out. We always have a testing phase, so we need to be ahead of it. It takes us longer before we can upgrade to the newest version.

I've known Duo Security for four years.

Their support is great. We use them a lot. It depends on what issues we're having, but we always get any service, so I'd rate them a ten out of ten. They're very responsive and very knowledgeable. They're more eager at points to get things figured out than we're ready to, which is good, but we have to step back.

We didn't use any other solution before. Its integration with the rest of our products probably made us go for it.

Its deployment is easy, but getting users bought in and starting to use it could be a bit difficult. That comes with any big change.

Our organization has definitely got a good return on investment on it.

I haven't seen it in a while, but it's at par with everything else licensing-wise.

Overall, I'd rate Duo Security a 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 began using Duo Security just after the pandemic began. We set up the VPN for our users so that they could connect from home and use the business applications. It is a security feature that is used on your mobile device, rather than something that is fixed in the office. You can use it at any given moment, as long as you have your mobile device with you.

Prior to implementing it, they were using just a username and password. That was not secure enough, so there had to be the second level of authentication. As it is now, it is integrated with the firewall. You put in your password and it is followed by a six-digit code that needs to be entered.

We operate in the financial sector so this product is crucial for our business.

The security codes are not generated locally, or on-premises. Rather, they are generated and sent from the cloud.

It is integrated with our Check Point firewall, which is used across different departments. People can connect from anywhere, including from home, and then utilize the business applications in different departments. All of them authenticate using the same firewall.

Importantly, it's not limited to one vendor or one firewall. You can use it to connect through a primary DC and a secondary DC, even if they are different vendors.

Using this product has improved our organization, primarily with respect to security. Even the system administrator, in charge of setting up the users, would not be able to use another person's ID to connect. This is because they would then need to use Duo Security, which resides on the user's device. This is something that other people cannot do because they can't generate the six-digit codes.

In terms of securing access to the applications on our network, this solution is very reliable.

With respect to our users feeling safe, secure, supported, and included, Duo Security is among the best solutions that we have ever used. We have not fully utilized all of the features. However, we're looking at using Duo to authenticate internet banking solutions. Providing a second level of authentication in these situations, perhaps in mobile banking, would be valuable.

Our regulatory requirements necessitate creating a very secure connection for financial services, which is what we get from this product.

Having a single solution for multifactor authentication makes it comfortable for the users. They only need to train on one product.

Maintaining network connectivity is not difficult. We are integrated with Fortinet and Check Point solutions. The Check Point solution is in a different data center than Fortinet, and Duo Security integrates with both of them, despite being from different vendors.

Overall, this product has helped us to remediate threats more quickly. There is no way that others can generate the security code, such as by using another server. They will not be able to connect or authenticate themselves another way.

The resilience that Duo Security provides is valuable in terms of meeting our audit requirements. This is important to us because it helps us to meet our regulatory requirements, which are set by the central bank and enforced by our cybersecurity team.

The most valuable feature is the ability for users to connect securely to the office using the VPN. There's no way to breach security using Duo. No user can connect from a different device, which guarantees access on a per-user basis. The only way somebody else can connect is if the user shares their VPN password, as well as the six-digit code. This is a well-accepted, business solution.

It is very easy to set up, configure, and integrate this product. It is also easy, from the user's side of things.

The interface is such that all of the management can be done from a single pane of glass. You can integrate as many applications as you want, and it's up to the enterprise that dictates that. Overall, it's easy to manage and administer. There are not too many moving pieces, which would make things more difficult to administer and troubleshoot when there are problems.

From our employees' perspective, they are confident that they are the only people that can connect to their accounts. Access to their own accounts remains under their control, and they are the only ones that can connect. 

The reporting feature is somewhat limited. All that you get is the list of times that the user connected. Given that it's only a secondary authentication, it may not be possible to enhance the reporting.

We have had instances where Duo Security stops working on a user's device, which we have fixed by uninstalling and then reinstalling it.

I am in my third year of using Duo Security.

Due Security is a very stable product. We have never had issues in that regard.

This is a very scalable solution. It's not limited to specific applications and we can use it across multiple ones.

We have 175 end-users.

If we need to reach out to them, they would quickly assist us. At any given time, you can get support from Duo Security. This is not a free product and the technical support team is very reliable.

I would rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

Prior to implementing Duo Security, our users were not using multifactor authentication. They were simply authenticating with a username and password. That was not secure enough, which is why we implemented the second level of authentication.

The initial setup is easy and straightforward. It is very quick to integrate and manage. As it is very easy to integrate, it works well to secure our infrastructure from end to end, helping us to detect and remediate threats.

You just download the application and within a minute or so, you have an admin panel. After that, it is integrated with the firewall and the users can then quickly connect.

The integration is easy because Duo gives you a list of steps that vary based on the application and vendor that you want to integrate with. For example, if you want to integrate with a Check Point product then you have one set of instructions, whereas if you want to integrate with a Fortinet product, there is an alternate set for that.

In total, the deployment took less than two hours to complete.

Our ROI is mainly from the security side. Because of the regulator's requirement, it's worth the procurement. That said, on our end, we're not fully utilizing the product because you can integrate it with different applications. At this point, we are just using the basic feature, which is to connect to the VPN.

The administration is comfortable knowing that no user can connect to the system without using Duo authentication.

From a business perspective, it is a little bit costly. The licensing is on a per-user basis. However, it's worth the cost.

We began with a free trial of the product that lasted for one month. After that, we paid for the license to use it.

We had an option to use Google Authenticator. It is also a secure solution but we chose Duo Security because it was recommended to us, and it has been acquired by Cisco.

We do not utilize all of the features that are offered by Duo Security.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is for two-factor authentication. We also use the solution to secure Microsoft Remote Desktop, VPN, and SSH connections.

We deployed the product primarily to address security concerns, for example, implementing a more secure security posture using Duo Security.

My initial deployment of the product at a previous employer was across multiple environments and business units. We were primarily an active directory shop using Windows servers and desktops and Wise desktops, all of which utilized Duo Security as their two-factor solution.

In my current environment, the tool is implemented in different forms, on-premise and in the cloud. We deploy it everywhere.

Duo Security has been utilized in multiple organizations I've worked for, and it simplifies connecting securely via VPN, Microsoft Remote Desktop, and SSH.

The app has greater stability than rival solutions such as Google Authenticator, and Duo Push authentication is a valuable feature. 

The product worked to establish trust for as long as I've used it. It's a more functional solution than some competitors, which I discovered during the POC process. I think that Duo Security considering all resources to be external is one of the reasons why they are at the top of their field. 

Duo Security simplified establishing trusted connections, making it easier to implement distributed network solutions. I've always found it to be a good part of a layered defense strategy. 

Most of the end users when I was responsible for implementation, didn't quite understand the value of the solution until it was demonstrated. 

The tool does provide single-pane-of-glass management in my experience. I haven't implemented the solution for years, but I'm a user in my personal and professional life. Therefore, I can say that feature is essential in making Duo Security one of the critical steps in a defense-in-depth strategy. 

I never had any problems maintaining network connectivity, and it always performs well.  

Based on the logging I have seen Duo Security use, I would say their solution does help with threat remediation. It is an integral part of the defense strategy. 

A robust two-factor authentication solution is a massive part of a proper defense strategy, and having Duo makes it easier to implement and manage that two-factor solution. 

I would like to see some features simplified, such as securing, configuring, and implementing Microsoft Remote Desktop. Other than that, the solution was rock solid throughout my time administering it. 

I have been using the solution for six years.

The solution is very stable, I've never seen it go down.

The product is incredibly scalable.

I had to contact technical support on a few occasions, and my problem was always resolved, but it took some time and work to reach a workable solution. My experience with them is primarily positive, but there is room for improvement.

Neutral

At the job in which I carried out the POC for the solution, we used physical RSA tokens, and I have been at locations that use HID tokens. In my opinion, the soft token solution is far better; it's more user-friendly, and staff can utilize the strategy more efficiently, effectively, and, unfortunately for RSA, more securely than the physical tokens offer.

The basic deployment is very straightforward, though some Microsoft Remote Desktop support elements were a little more complicated. Primarily in getting the correct values and additional resources required for the deployment.

I wasn't involved in the deployment at my current company. At my previous employer, I did the POC and the initial training for our help desk groups.

I carried out the implementation myself; I was responsible for maintaining all of the integration points and training the help desk team members to support the product.

It's hard to precisely measure an ROI for security solutions, but I would say it provides a return.

I haven't seen any information on the pricing in four years, so I can't comment on that. 

We tested a SecureAuth solution that didn't meet our security standards. We wanted to try RSA Authentication Manager, but that was more complex for users, so we decided to go with Duo Security.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

When I carried out the POC for Duo Security at my former employer, I pitched it to them because it simplifies the login process and has excellent notifications. Physical tokens can be hard to read, especially for admins and staff trying to remediate problems late at night. We wanted a solution that was easy to set up and configure, and that is what we got; being a cloud-based solution, Duo Security is much easier to manage. We don't need to worry about managing, upgrading, and configuring much on our side; that's all handled in the cloud.   

The first company I mentioned working for was based in Ann Arbor, and Duo Security is or was based there too. I had personal relationships with several team members and recognized their product's value.

The solution improved trust models within our organization, significantly changing how people view connecting to the network. I don't think that it has had an impact on employee morale.