Cisco Duo Reviews

We have implemented it in our organization, and we also implement it for our clients. Duo Security is used to push multi-factor authentication while signing onto computers. We have integrated it with on-premises Active Directory, Azure Active Directory, and Office 365. We have also integrated Duo Security with Mimecast and Mac devices. We have a couple of other use cases, but predominantly, it is for multi-factor authentication. It verifies the identity of a user through a token or a mobile phone app.

It is pretty seamless for establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from. There is logging everywhere. So, if something did happen, you can see everything. In terms of getting conditional access in Azure AD, once you have it set up properly, it just works as expected. They have a huge application inventory that you can integrate with to get that established. They're one of the top vendors.

It is seamless with an easy-to-use portal. It has a lot of automation in there to onboard users and get them to talk with the Duo system. Once they're in the Duo system, it really comes down to what applications they need to get access to, and they're off to the races. They do a great job on that.

It helps support hybrid work. It is very important to have something like that in place because when you are in a hybrid environment, you lose some visibility and control. Having Duo Security in place, you can analyze all different authentication logs and anything else that applications might be interacting with. You can quickly pinpoint and troubleshoot something if an issue comes up.

It is seamless in maintaining network connectivity. In terms of its uptime, in the last couple of years, I can't think of how many times it ever went down. It has to be a very high SLA. It is consistent in maintaining network connectivity across all workplaces, such as campus, branch, home, and micro-office environments.

It helps to remediate threats more quickly. With application logs, it definitely starts to point you in the right direction to figure things out instead of hunting in a bunch of different directions. In a single pane of glass, you can very quickly see which IP address it was coming from and who was trying to initiate that and on which device. It definitely speeds up the process.

Documentation is the most valuable feature, and if you ever have to reach out to them with a question, their support is also fantastic.

Its ease of use is also valuable. From start to finish, you can get the whole environment set up within a couple of hours. Everything is easy to follow. The UI is good, and the process is very straightforward.

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 have been implementing Duo Security for about four years. 

It is very stable, and they constantly update the documentation to make it easy to integrate with. The SLAs have been very good when working with them where it is not going down or there are constant problems or anything like that. Overall, it is a very good experience for anybody who is using it.

Its scalability is great. There are tons and tons of applications that you can integrate it with. It could become a key piece for the organization for authentication.

There are probably more than 20 customers who are using this solution.

We seldom had to use their support. Most of the time, we go to their FAQs or review their documentation, and we are able to find the answers that we are looking for.

We had an agent that wasn't installed properly on a Mac device, and they could quickly identify the issue and give us recommendations about what we needed to do to fix it. Once or twice, they've taken a little bit longer to get back to me. They've helped me in solving the issue, but it wasn't a seamless experience. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

I haven't yet used another solution, but that doesn't mean that I won't. Microsoft is another multi-factor authentication provider. Duo Security is a much more streamlined implementation. If you want easier management, Duo wouldn't meet that need. It is an additional layer of cost that has to get factored in versus a Microsoft solution that may already come included with your license.

It is very simple to integrate. You do need to have an understanding of how it integrates with all potential applications, and Duo documentation is fantastic and helpful in getting it implemented.

Its implementation takes as little as a few hours. Your bigger challenge usually is onboarding end-users into the Duo environment, which comes down to:

• How many users are part of the project?
• How easy is it to get in touch with them?
• How well can they follow the directions to get it fully set up?

We implement it for our clients. We are like an integrator. Our clients may purchase the licensing through Duo, and then they sign a statement of work with us to install and get it provisioned for them. Inexperience and not having the time to do it are the two primary reasons why clients ask us to implement it. Sometimes, they can set up the basic pieces of Duo, but they need help with integrating it with Office 365. That's because there are things that need to be set up on that side, and they may not know how to do that.

Most of the integrations are cloud-based. There are a few clients who want to have a user sign on to a remote desktop, which needs integration with on-premises Active Directory, but most integrations are with Mimecast, Office 365, and Azure AD, and all these are cloud-based.

It is affordable for what's coming to the table with it, but in this day and age, the cost is looked at under a microscope, and companies need to very finely define what is needed versus what is critical. In some cases, it might not be cost-effective for a company to have it. In a lot of other cases, it is the cost of doing business.

It is somewhat of an uphill battle to get users to buy into it, but after it gets implemented and they see how easy it is, it is a pretty seamless experience.

A big challenge with end-users is that they see it as another layer that they have to remember and worry about. It is very easy to set up the application to get authenticated. Once you break that curve, it gives end users a sense of security where they know that if they're trying to sign on to Office 365 or some other application, they need to authenticate with Duo to make sure that they have the multi-factor authentication. If they saw a request come in and it wasn't them, they can deny it.

Duo Security has had minimal impact on our organization, but we do have an increased feeling of security. Knowing that you have to have a certain device to authenticate into whatever you need to authenticate into gives peace of mind.

It hasn't eliminated trust from our organization's network architecture, but it has added efficiencies to it. There are other things that we might put in place to make sure that we get towards a zero-trust model, but it obviously aids in achieving that end goal.

It doesn't really provide single-pane-of-glass management. In terms of the security posture of an organization, Duo Security is not a one-stop solution for everything. You still need a combination of a lot of different security measures to develop the full posture, but as far as authentication is concerned, in that one layer, you get the authentication logs and easy integration with all different applications, and you also get some device insights and things like that. All of those together definitely give it points towards being a single pane of glass, but you need other security applications to make that holistic environment very security agnostic.

It is one of the many key pieces that all organizations need, especially if they want to integrate with many applications. There are other solutions out there, such as from Microsoft, for multi-factor authentication.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. There is always room for improvement, but for end-to-end authentication, it definitely provides a great mechanism for organizations in getting that single pane of glass.

A lot of our use cases were for customers to get their cyber insurance renewed. It was a requirement and they had to scramble to figure out a way to get multi-factor authentication in place.

It's made things easier for our customers with all the different ways to sign in. It's pretty painless once they get used to it. Once customers understand it, it checks all the boxes for them. It's easy for them to use. It also works with a lot of Cisco's other products.

• The easiest feature is the token or the app on your phone that gives you the code to log in.
• It provides a single pane of glass for management and that helps optimize the user experience.
  
• We get fewer threats to remediate due to the two-factor authentication, which does not allow as many threats through.
• It does a good job of establishing trust for every access request. It checks all the boxes I need and, as a reseller, it makes it easy for me to sell. I'm happy with it.

Sometimes, it's a little harder for customers to adopt.

Also, when it comes to the single pane of glass for management, there are some mixed reviews and opinions that say there could be some other options. But those are very unique cases.

The majority of my customers are really good with just the two-factor authentication and don't really take advantage of a lot of the extra bells and whistles that it has. Getting them to adopt more of those features, versus asking for anything new, would probably be where my first step would be.

I have been using Duo Security for about a year and a half.

The stability is good. I've never had an issue with it crashing or having bugs.

I've never had anything outgrow it. That's for sure. You just add licenses.

Tech support has been great. I've only had to open two cases and they've been very helpful and made it straightforward.

Positive

I've been involved in the deployment of Duo Security a few times and the documentation makes it straightforward.

Overall, the pricing is fair. Customers can wrap it into their Enterprise Agreement, making it easier for them to solve their issues.

We're a Cisco partner, so once the two-factor requirement kicked in and became mandatory for our customers' cyber insurance, we just gravitated right to the Cisco solution.

The proofs of value that we've done are really what sells it. You put it in, get them using it, and then you just buy the license and you don't have to go back.

Employees start off saying, "This is another thing we have to do," but once they get it set up the way they like it, it's very easy. And if anybody gets locked out, we get an email and it's easy to unlock. If the unions were able to adopt it, anybody can.

Overall, it meets all my needs, including price point, and I've been very happy with it.

We use it for two-factor authentication so that we're not just relying on the username and password but also on two-factor authentication, whether it's through SMS or through the application.

People use very weak passwords, so it's very easy for attackers to get in and compromise accounts. This is why we need two-factor authentication and why we are with Duo Security. It helps us to not only rely on the username and password but also implement another layer of protection. Attackers are not going to be able to compromise accounts because of the two-factor authentication.

It has definitely reduced embedding. We found a lot of problems with attackers being able to compromise accounts. Now, when they try to access accounts, they are not able to do so because there is an added layer of protection. Once we know that a username and password are compromised, we just reset the password to protect the company.

I like the two-factor authentication, which gives another layer of protection.

It's very important for our organization that this solution considers all resources to be external. Our company has thousands of people who access from outside, and it's hard for us to know which one is legitimate and which one is illegitimate. Having two-factor authentication with Duo helps us to implement a second layer of authentication so that we know for certain that the people who are accessing accounts are legitimate.

It's a great solution for securing access to the applications and network because we can integrate the solution with all types of applications. The system has the ability to integrate customized applications built in-house and those that were brought in from outside. It integrates with network access as well, such as when you want to access a different node. It has multiple ways to authenticate applications, network access, etc., which helps us a lot to spread the solution across all our assets.

That the solution helps support hybrid work is very important to our organization because people access accounts from everywhere. Duo Security gives us the second layer of protection.

The solution provides a single pane of glass management to help us monitor all of the access.

Duo Security helped us remediate threats more quickly.

It is not easy to maintain network connectivity.

Duo Security should have more customized use cases. For example, if a client needs to have more customization, it would be better to connect directly with Duo's R&D to try to discuss the issues together in order to add customizations.

I've been using this solution for the last two years.

The stability is definitely good.

The scalability is great. The solution is deployed in multiple locations, and we have around 30,000 people.

The technical support is good. They are helping us, and I would give them an eight out of ten.

Positive

We switched to Duo Security because it's easier to implement and can be spread across all the applications.

We have definitely seen an ROI from a protection perspective. It helped us a lot to protect against compromised accounts.

Price-wise, it's not cheap, but it's not expensive at all either. It's in the middle.

I would rate Duo Security at nine on a scale from one to ten.

Primarily, it was used as remote access for VPNs. It expanded our security posture, due to the increase in people working from home.

It certainly gave us a much more confident security posture as far as users coming on. 

Having all resources be external is reasonably important for us. Zero trust is certainly a target. Not that we are there yet, but we would expect everything to be considered mostly untrusted.

It eliminated trust for remote access, but not from inside our organization.

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.

Simple authentication for VPN was our primary function, and it worked well for that.

As far as remote access, simple access, and authentication to gateways, it was perfect.

Distributed access for ISE has been pretty strong for remote access and works very well.

It has very strong network connectivity, which works reliably and well. It was very easy for people to connect and the app worked as it should. Just once people connected, they typically had to use a different tool from that point on.

Duo applies and maintains well network connectivity across campus and remote locations. Remote access from people's homes and branches is also strong. Network connectivity is its strength and does that well.

We found it difficult to integrate it into our broader product family of Microsoft tools and other applications used across our organization. So, we have pulled back from this solution a little bit. It was easier to use Microsoft MFA, which integrated with everything and still did the two-factor authentication that we needed. 

There is nothing wrong with the product, as far as its functionality. It was just the breadth of support. It got harder and harder to integrate.

For what it does, it is fantastic. Once we started hitting Microsoft Office stacks, we then began to find its limitations.

It is not so good for securing access to our application and network. We found it harder to integrate, particularly with the Office stack, which is our primary application stack. We did get it working with a few other cloud applications that we were working with as part of our single sign-on story. However, it certainly wasn't easy to integrate in-house.

It created another step for users who don't know about the benefits, as far as the corporate benefits. I wouldn't consider having another app on their phones and having another thing to deal with a positive for our user community.

My organization has been using it for about two and a half to three years, since around the beginning of the pandemic.

Stability was good. It was well-designed and simple to implement. Its cloud interaction went very well. We never had any major stability issues. Yeah. We had nothing to complain about regarding its operational functionality.

We are a relatively small shop. It was well within our sizing. We never saw any issues with scaling. Obviously, the indications would be that it will scale very well, but nothing we had to experience with.

We didn't encounter the technical support much. Things worked very well. Functionality and reliability were never a problem. 

We asked a few questions about integration and so on. I think we got good answers back. We have had no big complaints, but we didn't have a lot of interaction with them.

We did not previously use another solution. We brought Duo in as a tool that we could rapidly and easily deploy. It did that job. We actually removed it later, as our primary tool, because we could achieve what we needed with a more integrated single multi-function tool (Microsoft MFA).

Duo brings in another application for users to deal with. Whereas, Microsoft integrates with their single authentication stack, allowing us to handle their own personal banking accounts and personal two-factor authentication needs in one app. This isn't Duo's strength, and it's not what we see Google and Microsoft doing out in the cloud.

Single-pane-of-glass management is important for us, but not critical, because fewer management points are better. Duo didn't provide a single pane of glass because of our different application stacks. Whereas, at least Microsoft Authenticator has allowed us to deal with most applications as well as their deep integration with Office.

Duo needs to adopt the same kinds of concepts that we see from all the major authentication tools, such as Google Authenticator, Microsoft Authenticator, third-party password tools like Bitwarden, and Secret Server from Delinea. All of these are beginning to incorporate more functions into them as a single security tool,  protecting me with authentication codes and six-digit codes that interact with Google, Microsoft, and any of those vendors as part of the tool. There are more functions, fewer tools, and less user impact, which are all benefits. I don't think Duo showed us that as a single tool. Duo did its job really well, but there are many jobs that have to be done.

Resilience security is all about business continuity. Resilience is an expected function of that, which is necessary and not optional.

For businesses wanting to build more resilience, I would say, "Keep it simple," and fewer moving parts is better. That is one of the reasons that we ultimately moved away from Duo. Not because anything was wrong with it, but we could collapse two functions down into one. I think simplicity is really critical. It reduces the amount of time our staff has to spend on it, making things easier. Simplicity would be my number one reason for building resilience into an organization. It allows you to understand better how you are dealing with threats and more simply respond to threats.

We are a valued reseller who works with Cisco and other vendors. We are primarily a Cisco networking shop across eight locations with 120-odd users who are mostly working from home or at least part-time working from home post-COVID. We have two major offices, a small data center, and five other locations, which are all remote access, using Cisco DMVPN. Microsoft is the application stack that we primarily use, plus cloud applications, and Juniper Mist for our wireless.

I would rate it as seven out of 10. In the world of network security, it is outstanding and very strong. I have a lot of positive things to say. I think that it needs to be much more seamlessly integrated with today's application stack.

We use it for two-factor authentication for end-user and administrator login. We wanted to secure our endpoints.

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.

I wouldn't mind seeing some options for remembering a device for a short period of time or a specific login, particularly for administrative engineering staff, as we may be logging in to four or five different services. We're having to use it a lot. I understand it, it's just part of it. That's not specific to Duo. That's two-factor authentication in general.

I've been using Duo Security for about a year.

It's stable. We haven't had any downtime that I can recall or any problems with maintaining network connectivity.

Any issues we've had have been local to a specific user. Maybe the phone number was not set up right or there was some conflict as a result of somebody changing a device, but it's always been pretty straightforward to get that kind of thing resolved.

We started off with a small deployment and, in one or two steps, sent it out to everybody and it scaled fine. We didn't have to change anything in our setup.

We have about 1,200 users across 60 branches around the U.S. We occasionally have people using it internationally and we're able to handle that fine with our geographic location blocking or allowing, as the case may be. It's a fully virtualized environment. We have a lot of remote users, people who work in remote fields. As long as they have a cell signal, it works.

I have not had to deal with any support for Duo. The less I have to talk to support the better, for sure.

This is our first venture into two-factor authentication.

We didn't have a specific problem we were trying to solve when we got it. We were just trying to add more and more security. We did have regulatory requirements for two-factor authentication and that is what drove it.

The deployment of Duo Security was mainly a project done by our network and security team, but I was involved in it to some extent. I found it pretty straightforward. As enterprise-wide security solutions go, it wasn't too bad.

We got it integrated with Active Directory. There were some struggles there that I don't know the specifics of because our network team was working on that. But once everything was set up, it was pretty easy to add a new user and do whatever we wanted to.

It took a little time for our users to get used to it, but everybody took to it pretty well. The users don't really have to interact with it other than getting their push notifications. For them, it's easy. It requires minimal training. It pops up and it's all pretty self-explanatory.

It's pretty easy to use as two-factor authentication systems go. We evaluated a few others, including the Microsoft two-factor authentication, a little bit, and one other, and Duo ended up being our favorite. Part of that was because we're in that Cisco ecosystem and we were able to integrate it with our other services that are all cloud-based. It fit in pretty well for us, and it would for anybody with a similar setup.

Duo was also the least obtrusive to the user and the ease of administration through the administrative portal was a little better.

Fortunately, we haven't had to evaluate it when it comes to helping us remediate threats more quickly, but we're confident that it will.

Regarding resilience in cyber security, two-factor is definitely a must-have. We're satisfied with it as far as that goes, in addition to it fulfilling our regulatory requirements.

For our use case, for logins, it just works.

We wanted multi-factor authentication across a variety of platforms.

It's improved security by enforcing strong, reliable multi-factor authentication, and it has reduced intrusions across our organization. It makes sure all the user sessions are at least a little more trustful than if we just had single-factor.

In terms of remediating threats, we are able to pick out unsuccessful login attempts pretty quickly on the Duo platform and we can shut down those accounts. It makes us more proactive. That works well.

The ability for users to authenticate via phone, from any random phone number, has been very helpful for managing a distributed workforce. Using it across a distributed network for securing access to our applications is big for us. It works very well, and we have no major complaints about the integration of any of our third-party applications.

We have a high level of confidence in the platform, especially for identifying potential logins from unexpected geolocations. The data associated with logs is very helpful for helping to make that determination.

It's very important for us that Duo Security considers all resources to be external, especially as we lead up to Zero Trust. It needs to be like that.

End-users find it more annoying than anything else. It's tough to manage user perception of the service, especially when there isn't feature parity between Mac and Windows users. There are some challenges in making that user experience the same between platforms and helping users feel the least amount of burden possible while helping to ensure the organization's security.

Network connectivity depends on where users are located. Internally, on-premises, it's not hard keeping connectivity, but 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.

I have been using Duo Security for two years. 

We've had no issues with the stability of Duo. I consider it to be a stable product.

It has scaled to meet our needs. I don't know how it scales if you have 10,000 or 20,000 users, but for our organization, with fewer than 5,000 users, it's been fine.

The technical support has been adequate. They are responsive regarding support for troubleshooting tickets. We haven't had any issues that required escalation, so we've been happy with it.

Positive

We did have a previous solution. The interoperability has been improved with Duo compared to that solution.

Our physical deployment of the solution is in the continental United States, but our users are worldwide.

I don't place too much value on any single product, since placing too much trust in one thing creates a single point of failure. This is just a single piece in a broader spectrum of security products to accomplish our actual goals.

Building resilience is nice, but there's a point of diminishing returns when it comes to doing that. Part of my job is to help our leaders understand where that diminishing return is.

The single pane of glass management is desirable, but it's like a unicorn. No single pane of glass is ever really a single pane of glass. That's something that would be nice, but it's not something I expect.

Duo is a very consistent product and flexible in how it can be deployed and has good support. It's a product we're very happy with.

We use it for MFA to secure our Outlook webmail and some other applications as well. We use Duo for pretty much anything that uses MFA. 

We were looking for increased security. We wanted to make sure that the person who is trying to log in to our services is actually who they claim to be. We wanted to lock down our applications more and provide extra security.

We have some on-prem servers for the gateways and it's in the cloud as well.

It has definitely made our company more secure. It's pretty easy to incorporate into any sort of application you want to. We also use it for single sign-on for certain applications and that has been nice. People hate passwords.

It's really great for remote workers and a hybrid workforce nowadays, for people who are trying to access their VPN or any applications from outside of the company. It helps us make sure it's someone who should be accessing those things. It does a good job.

It's definitely a factor in achieving that Zero Trust.

In a way, it helps us remediate threats more quickly. If someone is trying a brute-force attack, trying all the passwords they can, and they're not getting a response through Duo, you can see certain security threats that are happening and remediate them.

Duo has also had a big impact on employee morale. People like it. They feel that their data is more secure. Resiliency is very key to keeping people doing their jobs. Cyber security resilience has been very important for us. It used to be that security was not to be the main focus, but it's extremely important now. There are a lot of ransomware attacks and people need to be very cognizant of that. It's important to have redundant and resilient systems in place to support that.

It's nice to have that push notification with the app and it's pretty easy to use. Our users are usually pretty open to it, and it's pretty easy to onboard people.

It also seems like it's accurate, and you can add multiple devices to your account.

In addition, typically, if it detects that you're on an internal network, you can bypass the Duo portion of it. That way, people don't have to do MFA when they're on campus.

Another feature is the single pane of glass management. That's important for analytics and also for troubleshooting. It means there's one place that you go to at least start the troubleshooting process. It also helps with the user experience because you can manage all the user accounts from that one spot, including setting up new users, making adjustments, editing their preferences, et cetera.

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.

I've been using Duo Security for about two years.

It seems very stable. I don't think there has been any point at which people have tried to use it and it has failed.

The scalability seems fine. As long as you get the licensing to support it, you can add as many users as you'd like.

We have five or six offices locally, and a few more in different states in the US. We also have one in Shanghai, but they're doing their own thing there. But everyone in our US offices uses it, they all get enrolled. Typically, people will install the app on their phones although they don't have to.

I don't think we've had to use technical support too often, which is a good thing about the product itself.

We didn't use an MFA before Duo.

When the solution was rolled out, I wasn't with the company, but we then expanded it in different ways and I have been involved in that. In terms of the initial deployment, from what I can tell, it was relatively straightforward. And from what I've seen since, it hasn't been too hard to expand it to other services.

It's definitely a valuable product to have.

We may have evaluated other options at a surface level, but we didn't really go too deeply into them. We pretty much went with Duo out the gate.

I would tell leaders who want to build more resilience within their organization to do it right now. It's definitely important and there are a lot of resources out there that can help them on that path. Duo helps with that.

It does what it's marketed to do.

We use Duo Security for 2FA during logins.

We needed 2FA for compliance. We already used Cisco across the board, so it made sense to use the product. We benefit from using the solution. We were unaware that some users were sharing logins and doing some things that went against policies. Once we had Duo Security in place, we realized that codes were not going where they needed to, and we could sort that out. The solution is easy to use.

We have some users that don't prefer to use the app. The product could be more intuitive on the app. We have users that are a little dated in their technology adoption. Telling some of our non-intuitive users to use the app was a little struggle.

We implemented the solution about a year ago.

We haven't had any issues with the solution’s stability at all. We've had no issues with it not being compatible anywhere.

We're a pretty small shop. We have less than 100 employees, so scalability is not a huge concern because there's not a lot of growth right now. However, bundling and provisioning the tool with any device is pretty easy.

Support is good. We've had a couple of issues with the tool, and anytime we needed anything answered, we've got it resolved. Everything's been quick and reasonable. We generally expect to get answers the same day we have the problem, although it is not possible.

Positive

To my knowledge, we didn't have any issues in the rollout. We tried to phase it out over the course of a few weeks. Once we got a few of them tested, we went to the next phase. Then, we decided to go 100% with it because we saw no problems doing a stack of implementation. It was pretty good.

My organization sees an ROI on the product. If there's any attempt at a breach, then we're confident that it will be stopped.

The solution is deployed on the cloud. We're pretty sure it's on our end with the telephone system. We have set up automated phone calls to the desk phones, and sometimes they don't go through or are delayed. However, we've been looking through it and are pretty sure it’s on our telephone system.

I rate the product a seven out of ten in securing our infrastructure from end to end. It's pretty straightforward for people that have done 2FA before, but we have a lot of users that haven't. We have to do a little convincing to get them to do the additional step.

We have saved time by using the tool so that we can dedicate our time to other valuable projects. The tool’s Self-Service Portal helped us with uptime. The solution is good at establishing trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from.

We have policies for our machines and for our phones. The solution really opened our eyes to what people needed to do on their phones and what they were actually bringing to the building.

Duo Security absolutely helped our organization improve its cybersecurity resilience. Our employee and guest network are separated. However, people were bringing their personal devices and doing work-related things on them that we weren't aware of. The solution allowed us to see a little bit more of what was going on at the user level.

Duo Security was the first implementation in our organization. We did not use similar solutions before. Choosing the solution was a pretty quick process. Duo Security was the first one that we demoed. We didn't have any issues, so we went right with it. We chose it because of its ease of use and implementation. We were able to roll it out fairly quickly, so there was no reason to look elsewhere.

We had some partner companies and sister companies that were starting to have breaches. They told us that if we had 2FA, it wouldn't have been a problem.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use Duo Security for multi-factor authentication for our VPN.

We didn't have any MFA previously. Adding that extra layer of security helps.

Duo Security has been pretty good for securing our infrastructure from end to end so that you can detect and remediate threats. We've seen several of our employees leave the country, and we see their connections trying to go through and so forth. We can either add them to allow them access or keep denying that access, and we get alerted to that. 

It is pretty good in terms of user authentication and device verification for helping to prevent identity-based attacks. Your device is preauthorized. If somebody steals your device, they still need to know your password. That works out pretty well.

Duo Security helps reduce the risk of breaches. If I had known about it sooner, I'd have got it sooner. 

The Self-Service Portal has helped free up our IT staff. Our guys spend a little time, and they can go in and look at how to do things and how to set things up. It makes things a little easier. 

Duo Security establishes trust for every access request, no matter where it comes from. We really limit where we cannot be accessed from. It helps to make sure whoever we're letting in is who they're supposed to be.

Duo Security considers all resources to be external. If you treat everything as a threat, you're safer that way.

It has helped our organization improve its cybersecurity resilience. 

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. 

I'd like to see it integrated into other applications. I know there are some integrations, but I haven't been able to explore that any further. 

I've been using Duo Security for about the last 18 months.

It has been awesome. It's been a ten out of ten.

I haven't had a deal with that.

That's pretty good, but we didn't have to use them for this product. In general, Cisco support has been excellent. I'd rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

We didn't have MFA. This was our first one. We were using open-source VPN software and decided that we needed to add MFA. We didn't want to patch a bunch of different things together. Cisco AnyConnect and MFA together worked out very well. We also had a Cisco Firepower firewall, and we decided that one vendor for all of it would make it much easier. Its price was also very reasonable. It made it easy for us to make that decision.

It was straightforward. For most things that I've dealt with from Cisco, I've had to do a lot of research to find things, but with Duo Security, everything was right there for us.

We did it in-house. It was easy.

Less time is spent trying to figure things out with a bunch of different software. By having one vendor, there's not a lot of extra work that our guys have to do to keep maintaining that.

Pricing was very reasonable.

To someone researching this solution who wants to improve cybersecurity in their organization, I'd say that definitely give it a look. It's easy to set up. It was very easy for us to set up. We even had our Cisco team call us and make sure we had everything going. It was almost no effort, so it's worth a try. 

I'd rate Duo Security a ten out of ten.

We try to use the solution for pretty much everything that we can use with it. The tool helps us to get into our dashboard APIs, and log into Citrix, VPN, and servers. 

I love Duo Security's push notifications. It's simple, fast, and secure. From the user's perspective, the solution is seamless. The security aspect is great. 

We have been using the product for about two to three years in our company. 

I haven't seen any reason to think the solution is unstable. 

The product is very scalable from what I have seen. 

The solution's support is pretty good. It helped us quite a bit. Both Meraki and TAC have been pretty helpful. 

Positive

We switched to Duo Security due to the cybersecurity threats that came with COVID. There was a big one that came against us at one time, but we were able to squash it pretty quickly. The threat was not able to get into the mainframe because of the solution. 

The tool's setup was easy and we didn't require too much outside help to set it up. 

As a network and security guy, security is my return and it has been better with the product's use. 

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. Duo Security can get spotty at the back end but it doesn't break. It would be great if I could use the product to log into the routers or switches in the infrastructure. We already have Active Directory enabled in our routers and switches. However, if we could do two-factor authentication, then it could go a long way since no one's getting into them unless you want them to. We are all for more security in healthcare.