Cisco Duo is a two-factor authentication system (2FA), acquired by Cisco in October 2018. It provides single sign-on (SSO) and endpoint visibility, as well as access controls and policy controlled adaptive authentication.
$3
per month per user
Google Authenticator
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Google Authenticator is a mobile authentication app.
Google Authenticator generates codes, which is okay for certain sites, but not quite as robust as Duo. Of course, it's cheaper, but it doesn't do as much and the setup is more complicated on the back end. The only realm in which it's really even competitive with Duo is for …
Duo Security has the ability to push a notification to your device where a simple Google Authenticator requires a rotating series of numbers. Duo also has the ability to use a yubikey to use biometrics as another form of authentication. The ability to use Duo to protect Windows …
Duo / Cisco Secure Access, by Duo, is way better than the one I mentioned aboveI I also used Authenticator but with that software, it always requires me to enter the six-digit passcode all the time, there isn't support for the Apple Watch, and I need my phone handy to access …
We were using Google Authenticator but I faced lots of issues with code and Google time sync so I replaced it with Cisco Secure Access. It gives us all the features and I never faced any issues and downtime.
Yubico also works with Duo, however, the setup and use of Yubikey's tend to be for advanced users. The lay audience will never be able to successfully deploy the use of these keys. Duo mobile apps simplify life with the bypass code creation or via push notifications. Google …
Duo / Cisco Secure Access, by Duo is not a free application and requires a user license, unlike other solutions such as Google Authenticator and Microsoft Authenticator. However, you do get what you pay for. Duo / Cisco Secure Access, by Duo provides great backups of stored …
Ultimately we ended up going with Cisco Duo because we are a Cisco shop. All of our networking infrastructure, our phones, our wireless environment is Cisco based. It made logical sense to stay with a product that we already have a line of support with. With a smaller …
We use Microsoft O365, and it looks like I can leverage my existing license to save money by moving away from Cisco Secure Access by Duo. I am still in the research phase, so we might or might not stay with Cisco Secure Access by Duo.
Duo is easier than many token-based or code-based methodologies. It allows self-enrollment in ways that Google 2fa does not. Okta costs too much. LastPass is great for passwords, but we didn't want to keep our auth egg in that same basket. Many imitators have shown up since we …
Duo is the easiest one to use and definitely has the fastest turn around for sending you a code. I really enjoy using Duo and would recommend that anyone use this for their MFA.
We choose Duo as we found the end-user interface much easier and more intuitive than other solutions. The push notification feature also worked very smoothly and was a factor in the decision. From the Administrator and security team side - the features and capabilities of Duo …
The duo is highly configurable with multiple ways to authenticate. You can access a 6 digit refreshed code, we use the push feature that is life when your device requests a handshake Duo prompts the user automatically and very quickly, replying then completes the handshake. Duo …
Duo is easier to use since it is an app and only needs your phone for authentication. The other products I have used in the past require a separate device. Everyone carries their phone with them so there is no need to remember to carry around another device.
Duo Security has everything that we need. Didn’t find any missing feature. Quality of support as I mentioned before, is amazing. Easy to set up and use as compared to others. Pleasurable in terms of doing business with. Provides multi device sync and also backs up data. …
Google's authenticator is OK, but I do not believe it integrates with some bigger programs as easily. We've got it integrated with ConnectWise, Continuum, IT Glue, and all of our internal Citrix environments and more. Duo just seems vastly better overall with integrations and …
Being under the google umbrella gives a level of reassurance to our users. It seems to be cleaner and easier to use for our users. Being able to use a product from an already known vendor helps onboard new users to the software. It is clean and easy to use, all of the users …
First, Google Authenticator meets the security requirements which should be considered "table stakes". Second, simplicity is critical. Many users don' understand why they are setting up MFA (or they just don't care), and so adding additional complications to their day-to-day is …
Google Authenticator does one thing, and one thing well - it authenticates you are the account owner for the online account you are logging into. There are other alternatives out there such as DUO, and LastPass authenticator but Google Authenticator works for some of the most …
Setup was easier and transferring between accounts is simpler in Google Authenticator when compared against Symantec VIP. The other features kind of are the same where both provide keys in offline mode and work seamlessly. Keys are refreshed every 30 seconds in both the …
We were using Duo before in our environment for two-factor environment. But when it comes to availability we were always facing issues such as time-sync & app integration. After using Google Authenticator it resolved our synchronization issues as well as the third-party tool …
We deploy Google Authenticator in residential and non-managed client scenarios. Google Authenticator can perform the basic functions needed for multi-factor authentication but lacks the more advanced features of solutions like Cisco's Secure Access by Duo. Google …
Google Authenticator is a great alternative to FortiAuthenticator for our vendors to have us use to login securely to their secure portals and FTP sites. Google Authenticator does not require a setup by the Admin in order to use it. Google Authenticator does not require …
It is a very compete and solid solution Once it is in place, and you have configured the different settings and policies it is consistent and works well. It does take some time to work the kinks out. We had a Cisco support provider assist us while we stepped through the process of getting it set up.
Logging into my work accounts is where Google Authenticator works best. Also, I had a personal account get hacked. I had an account created to book hotels, but someone was constantly resetting my password. To prevent further hacking attempts, I set up Google Authenticator. I do not believe it would be appropriate for banking accounts.
We use Cisco Duo with different type of device and application, but we never face any difficulties to integrate Cisco Duo with any of them.
We integrated Cisco Duo with some of our active directory and some of the OS are quite old but Cisco Duo works totally fine with them.
The end user application is very easy to use. We never had any complain from non tech team members of having trouble of using Cisco Duo.
There are several authentication methods available rather than passcode. I personally like the push notification which is always on time and quite fast.
Documentation is oftentimes missing key information for proper implementation. This is circumvented by reading third-party guides or contacting support for additional details.
They do not push Fail-Closed as much as I think they should. Fail-Open is fairly trivial to bypass and it should be made known to the customer during setup how much this will affect overall security.
More vendor integration is something that is always craved by administrators. There are so many third-parties to integrate with.
I once performed a factory reset of my smartphone which had Google Authenticator. I didn't have a backup for the device. When I restored my phone with the same google account, I was not able to restore the authenticator app settings. I had to add all the keys back into the app to use it. This is cumbersome, but I understand it is set up this way for security reasons.
I don't like the ease with which it lets you delete a key. If I accidentally delete a key, I am doomed to get my 2FA key reset, unless I still have the QR code saved somewhere.
There are a lot of competing solutions on the market; however, Duo "just works", and there is little to no learning curve for the new members to be acclimated to it. As long as that continues I see it as the preferred option moving forward
La interfaz es intuitiva y fácil de navegar, lo que permite a los usuarios administrar sus dispositivos y acceder a las políticas sin problemas. La integración con las aplicaciones SSO y SaaS facilita aún más el proceso de acceso, mejorando la experiencia del usuario.
It's as easy as opening the app and what I need it for is there. I don't have to fumble with other accounts or getting something else to open it for me. I have all the access that I need for the use of the app within seconds and I can get access to the info that I need.
In the last 5+ years we've been using Duo, there may have been 1 outage that impacted us. We do receive periodic notifications of issues but, for the most part, they impact carriers or functionality that we either don't use, or do not care about.
I have not needed direct support for Cisco Secure Access by Duo as I have not had a problem with it, but I have full confidence that the support is outstanding. It is now a core component of the corporate technology stack - a problem would mean a serious degradation in the ability of the company to function.
I have found Google’s support to be hit or miss. There are times when they are very responsive, and I get my issue resolved quickly, and there are times where a response from them takes weeks. There is no in-between. But my support experience with this particular product is nonexistent because I have not had a problem with it yet. Hopefully, we do not have any problems with it either.
Implementation was straight forward and you can isolate different scenarios in order to test new application setup or add to an existing setup. Gui interface is pretty easy to understand and follow. I had no experience with Duo and still manage to easily set up new policies and rules.
I would fully expect a competitor like Okta or any other multifactor mechanic to function pretty similarly, and I hesitate to say duos the best. I think the idea is that it's a simple concept, but it does it well. So I haven't evaluated any myself outside of duo, but I'm also not in the market and I don't feel like we need to go shopping for something else.
First, Google Authenticator meets the security requirements which should be considered "table stakes". Second, simplicity is critical. Many users don' understand why they are setting up MFA (or they just don't care), and so adding additional complications to their day-to-day is always challenging. When it is simple, it makes life a lot easier. Finally, trust (due to the brand name recognition, primarily) removes any notion of "what is this?" that the user may have from being required to install something on their personal device for work purposes.
More secure data = less worried about a data breach.
Takes longer to log in, and if I don't have my phone then I have to go looking for it, so it really makes it so that you can't be without your phone, which in certain instances is annoying or not possible and can hold up work time.
Everyone is willing to use the same program because everyone likes Google—makes it easier to manage.