Cisco Duo Reviews

My main use case for Cisco Duo is identity and access management or verification, authentications, resetting passwords, self-service password reset, and managing and improving the security layer of the environment.

I use Cisco Duo for access management or verification, for example, when resetting the password for a client and we need to verify them, we could send them a reactivation text or we can send them a Duo Push. That's how we follow the process.

Other scenarios with Cisco Duo include Duo reactivation where people change their device and receive a new one. Then we have to get it onboarded and we send the reactivation text. They can activate with a single click.

The best features Cisco Duo offers and which stand out to me is Duo Push because it's the convenient option where we can just send a Duo Push and the person can just approve the push and then right away they can get in, saving the time to type in the password.

The convenience of Cisco Duo has impacted my workflow and my clients by providing ease of access, enhanced security, reduced risk, and reducing phishing and spam instances.

I would add that the integration among different applications and partner applications, such as Microsoft and other tenants, which includes Cisco Duo sitting as an agent or an intermediary between both the APIs, is a vital feature.

Cisco Duo has positively impacted my organization by reducing the metrics taken to resolve the issue. If the person can reset a password using the self-service password reset where they can verify using a Duo Push, it saves them time because they can do that in 10 minutes. When we need to do it on the domain controller and we need to sync over the password with the domain, it could take more than 30 minutes. We are definitely saving out of 30 minutes here.

I believe Cisco Duo needs to be improved on the delay process because there is a delay when we send a Duo Push or when we are signing into any applications. We can work on making it faster and speed this up. That's the part we need to work on, and on the outages, instances where we face issues with Cisco Duo and they are disabled, and systems are not working.

While the user interface of Cisco Duo is good and does not need to improve as it is quite user friendly, we do need to improve on the API because that is causing a delay in the process of revoking the tokens. The tokens are being sent a little late. Sometimes it has happened with me on multiple clients.

I have been using the solution for about four years.

In my experience, Cisco Duo is stable but not agile and not optimized, as there are delays when using the application and delays with APIs.

The customer support for Cisco Duo is great.

My organization used Microsoft Authenticator before Cisco Duo, and I switched because it was an option. I switched from Microsoft Authenticator to Cisco Duo because the GCP one is on Microsoft Azure.

Looking back at my initial investment in Cisco Duo versus the total value it has delivered over time, I see that it has paid more than what we invested, so we are getting a good return and a good service with improved security.

My advice to others looking into using Cisco Duo is that they can go for the product. I would rate this product a 9.

I mainly help customers to setup Cisco Duo for multi-factor authentication.

Duo significantly increases phishing resistance for application access. So the main benefit is improved security.

Passwordless authentication - This is the future of secure access. By eliminating passwords entirely through FIDO2/WebAuthn, Duo removes the primary attack vector for credential theft while also simplifying the login experience for users.

Cisco Duo is technically excellent, but the main challenge is market positioning rather than product capability. Microsoft Authenticator comes bundled with Microsoft 365 at no additional cost, so many organizations default to that solution rather than purchasing Duo as a standalone product.

I have been using Cisco Duo for approximately one and a half years.

Cisco Duo is very stable. I have never experienced major outages or service disruptions. The product itself is reliable - any minor issues we've encountered were typically user configuration errors rather than platform problems.

The scalability is excellent. Being cloud-based, Duo handles any user count without infrastructure concerns. We've scaled it across multiple customers without performance issues.

I have no experience with their support - I have never encountered issues that required contacting Cisco. The product documentation and admin portal have been sufficient

Yes, I used Microsoft Authenticator but only as a end user. In my opinion, Duo is simpler and more intuitive. From an admin perspective, I can't give a review.

The initial setup is straightforward and fast. Duo's phased rollout approach shows they understand real-world deployment challenges. Overall, it's very easy to implement.

My company is a Cisco Duo reseller and partner, so we perform the deployments ourselves for our clients rather than using external integrators or consultants.

I don't have quantifiable ROI data. The value is primarily in risk mitigation - preventing phishing and credential theft. The cost of a single breach would far exceed the investment in Duo. I cannot speak to operational cost savings like reduced password reset tickets.

The pricing is fair and straightforward - per-user licensing makes budgeting simple. Setup is easy and intuitive. The licensing tiers are well-structured and easy to understand.

9 out of 10. Duo is technically excellent - stable, feature-rich, with outstanding passwordless capabilities and straightforward deployment.

My advice: Take advantage of the free tier (up to 10 users) and 30-day trial to test it in your environment.

Cisco Duo is used for multi-factor authentication for VPN users and remote access users. I only use the MFA feature of Cisco Duo, and the application is excellent. The dashboards and everything about managing the product is clean and intuitive.

Cisco Duo benefits the company by increasing the security footprint, and it is easy to manage users, disable users, or bypass if needed in case of an emergency. The MFA feature is particularly strong, with an excellent application interface. The dashboards and everything about managing the product is clean and intuitive.

I have not implemented Cisco Duo's end-to-end phishing resistance with capabilities such as proximity verification. I am very happy with Cisco Duo as it is and would not be able to name a feature that could be improved. It was easy to set up and manage, making it an excellent product.

I am uncertain whether Cisco Duo should focus on AI or cost-effectiveness. It is not an expensive product for our company size, and I am unsure what AI could benefit in the solution.

I have been working in my area of expertise for about 12 years.

I have not experienced any downtime with Cisco Duo proxy or the Cisco Duo service in the setup. The only downtime occurs when upgrading the proxy server.

Cisco Duo scales with the growing needs of the company straightforwardly. I have not implemented the other features of Cisco Duo such as Passport, but purchasing more licenses and adding more users is simple.

I have never had to reach out to Cisco Duo's customer service or technical support, so I cannot comment from experience, but I am confident they are competent at what they do.

Prior to adopting Cisco Duo, I was using YubiKey.

Before choosing Cisco Duo, I considered YubiKey. I had been using YubiKey for some time, but when evaluating a platform to perform multi-factor authentication for the organization, I advocated strongly for Cisco Duo because I had been using the Cisco Duo product for a long time for all two-factor authentication needs, and I was already satisfied with the product.

I did not set up YubiKey, so I am not familiar with its technical specifications. YubiKey is a physical key on a keychain that is inserted into a USB port, and they are prone to breaking. Cisco Duo has always been on my mobile phone, making it simple to transfer everything when my phone breaks or I receive a new one.

My experience with deploying Cisco Duo was straightforward, following the documentation. The only issue I encountered was that the documentation was somewhat outdated regarding the file structure of Cisco Duo proxy, but this was not difficult to resolve in a few minutes.

I started the implementation, and then another project took priority, which is why Cisco Duo Directory has not been deployed.

Pricing for Cisco Duo is good, at least for the company size and scale. The setup process was simple. Cisco Duo provides excellent documentation on everything from the proxy and the RADIUS, and how the two should connect. It was a straightforward process, and I was up and running in about one day.

Before choosing Cisco Duo, I considered YubiKey. I had been using YubiKey for some time, but when evaluating a platform to perform multi-factor authentication for the organization, I pushed hard for Cisco Duo because I had been using the Cisco Duo product for a long time for all two-factor authentication needs, and I was already satisfied with the product.

I have tried Cisco Duo Directory to manage user identities, but it has not been deployed yet.

I am not currently using Cisco Identity Intelligence.

I have not noticed any increase in phishing attacks in the company recently.

I would rate Cisco Duo a 10 because it is easy to manage, quick to set up, and offers good value for the price point, contributing to the organization's security. I would recommend going straight with Cisco Duo because it offers probably the best value for the price point, and setup is quick to reach a testing phase.

Cisco Duo has not helped the company reduce overall authentication-related costs, but the organization does gain value from it, even though there is a cost involved.

My main use case for Cisco Duo is providing MFA for all of our users and use cases.

The first focus with Cisco Duo is securing externally available applications, such as SaaS applications. Mostly, we ingest or enforce Cisco Duo via our SSO IDP point because then we do not have to worry about the native integration with whatever application we are trying to secure. If it is SSO capable, we inject Cisco Duo into that.

When it came about, I was a big fan of the risk-based authentication feature of Cisco Duo. That was a big win. Additionally, the Verified Push after the Cisco breach was important, as Cisco recognized that they had to do something about that and they came up with the Verified Push, which is also a very good idea. Nowadays, if I would have known a couple years back what I know today, I would not have worried about that too much because I would have just moved over to passwordless and phishing-resistant MFA means in the first place.

The major improvement I would suggest for Cisco Duo would have been to collaborate with Microsoft more closely and get positioned in a way as a recognized MFA authentication method on Entra. Since Microsoft forced all of their customers to enforce MFA when logging into anything in the Microsoft universe, Cisco Duo was not a recognized way of doing that. It was enforced as an external authentication method, as Microsoft calls it, and it was not a native Cisco Duo integration. Even the external one was not possible to select as a default, so we had to use something else along with it, which for us was Microsoft. That was very annoying.

Cisco Duo did not help reduce the cost of the overall authentication method that we have in our company; instead, it increased, obviously. Cisco Duo was the first technology that we introduced, which had to not just change or implement a certain technology. That was the easy part; the hard part was changing the habits and the culture, getting people to accept what MFA is and to go through the hassle of MFA every single time. The total cost of ownership increased, along with the implementation and the license cost, as well as the reluctance of users to handle IT systems. Security is always a fine balance, where we have to explain to the users what we are doing, why we are doing it, and not overdo it.

Where it lagged behind a lot is in the RDP integration, because we have users, especially in Germany or other jurisdictions, where we cannot force users to use their phone. Therefore, we had to give them some kind of Passkeys, and they are not supported in every use case, or if they are accepted, it is extremely tedious. With standards such as OAuth or FIDO2, that can vastly be improved. Apart from that, it is a very solid MFA solution.

I have been using Cisco Duo for seven or eight years.

Regarding the stability and reliability of Cisco Duo, it is very good. It always does exactly what it is supposed to do, with no downtime over the years that we have had it in use, despite the issues I mentioned with Microsoft, where we were not able to integrate Cisco Duo at all.

Prior to Cisco Duo, I did not use another MFA solution; that was the first one.

I would describe the experience of deploying Cisco Duo as super simple. It was straightforward, one of the easiest consoles I ever had to implement.

I can still say that I have seen a return on investment from Cisco Duo, as having MFA is a basic requirement nowadays. MFA is considered state-of-the-art if you look at things such as GDPR or any other information security framework, so not having MFA means you cannot put a price tag on that because you will be hit with ransomware immediately.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Cisco Duo is that we have it as part of an Enterprise License Agreement, so that is probably not comparable.

Before adopting Cisco Duo, I evaluated a couple of other solutions, but at that time, Cisco Duo won out primarily because it was available as part of the Enterprise License Agreement, and we were a big Cisco shop already.

I am not using Cisco Identity Intelligence.

I have not noticed an increase in phishing attacks recently in my organization because we are pretty well set up in terms of email protection.

I just learned about the Proximity Verification capability with Cisco Duo. We do not have it because we are already using Passkeys, so we no longer need Proximity Verification.

I did not deploy Cisco Duo Directory to manage the user identity.

I would give this review an overall rating of 8.

For primary purposes, I am using Cisco Duo as an office gateway and Wi-Fi solution.

My experience with Cisco Duo's strong security authentication system has benefited my organization; it is quite simple. It helps to manage potential threats because there are many things; if you have connected any network equipment and someone has used any third-party equipment, it will alert immediately, detecting many things which are bypassing the network equipment very well.

There is much that is helpful in having a complete passwordless environment with Cisco Duo; previously, we had a lot of password handling and saving, with people forgetting passwords, but now we do not face those problems anymore.

To improve Cisco Duo, we have some third-party hardware, and for integrations with that, we need more user-friendly integrations since third-party integration can present a lot of compatibility issues with legacy products.

In terms of deployment, Cisco Duo requires some improvement.

I have been working with Cisco Duo for the past two to three years.

Stability is one thing, and it is very stable.

We do not have any scalability issues because we only have an alerting system; we do not have any AI integrations at this time.

It takes two months to deploy the product because we have many different locations, almost 15 countries.

I would rate the technical support of Cisco as seven.

For security, we use only Cisco at this time.

Deployment of Cisco Duo was, at the beginning, a little bit tricky with the designing and all the considerations, then after that, it is very convenient to handle.

For a non-prepared, non-technical user, it could be tricky and quite complex. The implementation part is not simple as it requires many things to be taken care of before it is a stable solution.

For the part of the deployment, we hired a third-party vendor who implemented and trained us, and now we are handling that.

It is beneficial in terms of finance to use Cisco Duo with some return on investment and cost reductions in the long run.

It is a little bit expensive, but with security, we cannot compromise on it.

I have not thought of some alternatives or of switching to some other products.

I do make use of advanced identity threat detection and response features.

I am not much of a user, but we have a team to handle those things, which are the advantages of Cisco Duo.

In the past one year, we have not upgraded to any new features.

I am not much aware about Cisco Identity Intelligence, but my team looks at those things; I have very little information on that.

My overall rating for this product is seven.

The primary use cases for Cisco Duo include two-factor authentication from the internet and SSL VPN integration with Cisco Duo.

My experience with Cisco Duo's strong security authentication system has been good; it performs very well when logging in.

I have not used Cisco Duo's conversational AI interface for admin tasks.

My impression of Cisco's Identity Intelligence capability to detect and respond to identity-based risks is that it is good, but the problem is that their reporting is not good compared to Palo Alto and Fortinet; the reporting would be a struggle.

I do not utilize the Advanced Identity Threat Detection and Response feature because we have Cisco IPS, so we are using that instead.

Cisco Duo could be improved by making it available on Microsoft Azure.

I would rate Cisco Duo seven out of ten because of the issues I have already mentioned. The Cisco firewall is a bit slow, and I am uncertain whether they have a mobile pass feature in Cisco Duo.

I think a mobile pass feature should be an alternative option nowadays in case there are any issues in the telecom sector.

I have been working with the product for more than two years.

There are no new features or functionalities in Cisco Duo that my organization has started using recently. We have two-factor authentication with FTD, and as I mentioned, we are moving to the cloud, so we will deploy Cisco Duo on the cloud for our cloud-hosted applications.

I do not think Cisco Duo is the best option on the market thus far.

I used FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Authenticator before Cisco Duo.

I think the pricing of Cisco Duo is acceptable; we know how to reduce the cost.

The choice depends on how the data centers are moving. If they are completely moved to the cloud, then we will use Microsoft.

I have experience with Cisco Duo. I have been quite satisfied with Cisco Duo. The implementation of Cisco Duo is straightforward. I am a customer of Cisco. I would rate this product seven out of ten overall.

Cisco Duo's main use case for my organization is confirming authenticated clients. We currently use a secure setup where we rely on YubiKeys to log in, and we depend heavily on Cisco Duo to help authenticate that.

My most favorite feature of Cisco Duo is the ability to detect whether or not we have a secure endpoint already, such as antivirus installed on our desktop or whatever we're using to authenticate, which is a huge part of security.

My organization has taken steps to become more resistant to phishing attacks by having the ISO team conduct extensive training for its end users, not only for students but also for internal users as well. We rely heavily on constant updates to Cisco Duo and whatever we can do to change the landscape of how we do security, we often push for it.

I would rate my experience with Cisco Duo at around eight out of ten.

The experience with customer support and tech support when I first started with Cisco Duo was lacking on some parts where we were having issues. However, over the past close to two years, they have definitely improved overall for support. Not only has the product been very good and we have done fewer support cases, but I think support overall has been very fast.

I have been in the industry for about a little over five years, and most of my time has been spent working at Yale University.

When I got to my current job, Cisco Duo was already implemented, so it would have been in use for well over five years.

Cisco Duo has been very reliable from my point of view so far, as I have not had any issues with it. The updates as they come are definitely very efficient, resulting in no complaints about it. Through my five years at Yale, Cisco Duo Desktop or Cisco Duo in general has not been an issue for me at all.

If Cisco Duo were removed, it would heavily impact my ability to manage and secure access across my entire identity ecosystem.

The experience with customer support and tech support when I first started with Cisco Duo was lacking on some parts where we were having issues. However, over the past close to two years, they have definitely improved overall for support. Not only has the product been very good and we have done fewer support cases, but I think support overall has been very fast.

I do not know what they used prior to Cisco Duo. I believe, because we have been on this long project for close to 9 or 10 years, it is possible that Cisco Duo has been implemented for a long time and possibly is the original solution we have always been using.

I have not heard about any deployment issues with Cisco Duo, even from my time at Yale University, and I do not recall anyone complaining about when it was set up. From my point of view, there were no issues on our end.

For my team, I am involved in the pricing, cost, and cost setup processes. However, I believe for Cisco Duo Desktop, I would not be part of that conversation.

With Cisco, the experience regarding pricing has always been very smooth for us. The sales team, whenever we talk to them, regardless of any department, has always been very straightforward and simple, so I have no complaints on my end from them.

I am not aware of any competitors that were considered when they were picking Cisco Duo, as they have not mentioned anything about competitors. Even moving on from Cisco Duo, they have not mentioned anything.

In terms of advice for any other companies or organizations that are considering Cisco Duo, I cannot think of any specific advice. However, in terms of reliability, we have had no issues with it, so if reliability is a huge priority for your organization, then I would definitely look towards Cisco Duo. My overall review rating for Cisco Duo is ten out of ten.

My main use cases for Cisco Duo are VPN and SaaS.

I find Cisco Duo to be convenient and quick. We do use Cisco Duo's push notifications method, and it is really quick, which is one of the convenient things about it.

I assess that Cisco Duo's dashboards do fine in identifying security vulnerabilities.

The trusted endpoint device capabilities of Cisco Duo fulfill a requirement and fill the gap; I don't think we have anything that it doesn't address.

I don't use Cisco Duo's adaptive authentication feature, and I don't know what that is.

I really need something that works with RADIUS and TACACS+, and ICE in general, which should be a little bit easier to integrate for admin, especially for elevated access beyond just clients and end users.

I know that Cisco Duo is pretty expensive; we have affiliates that use the Microsoft product just because Cisco Duo is so expensive, and they don't want to pay for it.

I have been working in my current field for four years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Duo as having had some stability issues, but they are usually brief, and it's not a big deal. I haven't had any large-scale, two-day outage kind of thing where people couldn't access their materials.

Cisco Duo scales well with the growing needs of my organization; we don't have any problems with scaling. I don't know that we had any issues with expanding usage other than the licensing costs.

I wouldn't be the one that calls in if there's a support issue, so I don't think I can really answer the rating for customer service and technical support.

Prior to adopting Cisco Duo, I was not using another solution to address similar needs.

My experience with deploying Cisco Duo involves having issues with users outside of the company; we didn't want to give them app access. For people in India, we ended up enabling it for them, but a lot of people outside the company have to be shipped key fobs, which are relatively cheap but just another process.

I haven't seen any return on investment with Cisco Duo; it is expensive, but it's better than not having MFA, and I know that could be more expensive than having some kind of compromise.

I don't remember the other solution we considered before selecting Cisco Duo, but I am happy that we went with Cisco Duo because it is just easier to use.

I assess the effectiveness of single sign-on as a necessity; we can't have people barely manage one password, let alone four or five. I would rate this review an overall eight out of ten.

Cisco Duo is a cloud-based multi-factor authentication and zero-trust security platform used primarily to verify that users logging in are who they claim to be and that their devices are trusted before access is granted.

Cisco Duo's secure access for VPNs and remote users stands out as a valuable feature, as it integrates with Cisco AnyConnect and third-party firewalls and VPN solutions such as Palo Alto, FortiGate, and SonicWall, which is valuable for hybrid and remote work environments.

I use the unified identity intelligence in Cisco Duo to facilitate understanding user behavior, and this understanding helps my organization by providing a consistent and centralized identity for a user across all systems, applications, and other access methods, allowing a single identity for all systems and applications.

I use the end-to-end phishing resistance feature in Cisco Duo, which helps my security posture by securing the entire authentication journey, meaning that phishing attacks fail even if a user is tricked into entering credentials up to the final access.

Areas that have room for improvement in Cisco Duo include pricing, as Cisco is quite expensive, and the fact that Cisco Duo relies heavily on external identity providers such as Active Directory or Entra ID and does not offer full identity lifecycle management on its own, which leads organizations to often pair Cisco Duo with another IAM solution for complete identity governance.

I have been using Cisco Duo for approximately five years.

Cisco Duo's stability is quite good, and I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Cisco Duo is quite scalable, and I would rate it a seven out of ten.

I would rate Cisco support as very good, an eight out of ten, where ten is the best.

Positive

Although my company uses only Cisco Duo, I have considered other solutions such as Microsoft Entra ID, which integrates identity provider, MFA, SSO, and conditional access for Microsoft ecosystems, with deep conditional access and risk policies tied to Azure services and Microsoft 365. When comparing Cisco Duo with Okta, Okta includes Universal Directory, advanced SSO, lifecycle automation, and API access management, along with a massive integration ecosystem with thousands of pre-built app integrations, making it ideal for large and diverse enterprises.

The return on investment I have seen with Cisco Duo is quite good. Although it is expensive, once established, it proves to be very efficient and helps with authentication significantly, leading me to estimate approximately a fifty percent return on investment.

The increase in phishing attacks is noticeable, as they appear to increase daily. My advice for others looking to implement Cisco Duo is that if they already have an existing solution and want to add something, Cisco Duo would be perfect. If they want to start from scratch, they can consider Okta, and if they have a Microsoft and Azure environment, they can opt for Microsoft. However, if they predominantly work within a Cisco environment, then Cisco Duo would be the best choice. I believe Cisco Duo is worth the investment, offering a good return on investment, as it is expensive but works very well without any downtime or high maintenance, and the support is also good. Approximately 2,300 users in my company use Cisco Duo. Cisco Duo is not entirely local or global, but rather is located in one place. Cisco Duo does not necessarily require any maintenance. Cisco Duo was purchased through the Marketplace rather than directly. I gave this review an overall rating of seven out of ten.

My main use cases for Cisco Duo are two-factor authentication and single sign-on for different solutions.

The feature I like the most about Cisco Duo is the dashboard to have everything in one single place and manage multiple customers and multiple tenants simultaneously.

Cisco Duo benefits my organization because we do not have too many logins since everything is in one place and we can use Cisco Duo for VPN, applications, and cloud solutions. This is a main benefit and the core purpose of the product that we are utilizing.

I think Cisco Duo can be improved. I found the onboarding was very difficult, even for engineers who have been using similar solutions before. For our specific implementation, we needed to have multiple groups, multiple companies, and multiple third parties, and I felt that the examples and material provided were insufficiently detailed. The onboarding videos, materials, how-to guides, and documentation should be improved dramatically.

I have been using Cisco Duo for approximately three years.

I did not notice any downtime or crashes with Cisco Duo. We focused on making modifications and changes only during maintenance windows, and afterwards in production, we did not have any downtime.

Cisco Duo's scalability works well with the growth of our company and does not seem to have a limit. We could add as many users and as many sites as needed, so scalability is not an issue.

Before implementing Cisco Duo for this particular customer, I did not consider another solution. However, for other customers, we also use some open-source solutions and cloud providers, which unfortunately seem to be winning over Cisco Duo.

I cannot say I have seen a clear return on investment. However, as I was only the integrator, it is difficult for me to make an estimation on the customer's actual ROI. That said, considering that they did not have any more attacks, it is probably positive, but I am not able to fully evaluate that.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Cisco Duo is that it is not an expensive product. The issue was that we had a customer migrate away because they moved to one of the cloud providers for identity management as well. The difference in cost to upgrade to directory services on that platform was cheaper than having Cisco Duo. However, generally, if a customer is not tied to a specific cloud vendor, then the pricing is acceptable.

I do not recall seeing Cisco Identity Intelligence or using it.

I have noticed an increase in phishing attacks recently, and this was exactly the reason one of our customers asked us to implement Cisco Duo because they were attacked before and lost quite a bit of money. After that incident, we deployed Cisco Duo for them. While using Cisco Duo, we did not have any issues regarding other attacks.

When implementing Cisco Duo, I implemented end-to-end phishing resistance with the proximity verification as the full solution.

I deployed Cisco Duo Directory to manage user identity.

I am using it as an identity broker because we were not integrating to the customer's Active Directory. It was actually functioning as an identity proxy rather than as a directory per se.

The organization's overall cost for authentication was higher, but the indirect cost of being attacked and losing data is significantly greater.

I discovered new benefits after initial implementation when we started with basic VPN authentication and then developed many other flows based on that. We learned that there were not enough examples or documentation available so we could start from the beginning knowing everything about the product.

The deployment experience was complicated as it was a trial and error process. We had multiple existing systems, and for each system we wanted to integrate with Cisco Duo, the approach was different. One was connecting directly, one was using the API, one was using SAML, and one was using directory services, making the process quite challenging.

I would rate this review an eight out of ten.