Cisco Duo vs. Firebase

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Duo
Score 9.5 out of 10
N/A
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
Firebase
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Google offers the Firebase suite of application development tools, available free or at cost for higher degree of usages, priced flexibly accorded to features needed. The suite includes A/B testing and Crashlytics, Cloud Messaging (FCM) and in-app messaging, cloud storage and NoSQL storage (Cloud Firestore and Firestore Realtime Database), and other features supporting developers with flexible mobile application development.
$0.01
Per Verification
Pricing
Cisco DuoFirebase
Editions & Modules
Duo Essentials
$3
per month per user
Duo Advantage
$6
per month per user
Duo Premier
$9
per month per user
Phone Authentication
$0.01
Per Verification
Stored Data
$0.18
Per GiB
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco DuoFirebase
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco DuoFirebase
Considered Both Products
Cisco Duo
Chose Cisco Duo
None, we are happy with offering Cisco Duo
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE)
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco Duo supplements the above products in providing MFA
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco Duo provides a much richer user experience, the UI is way more modern, and the product itself is easier to use.
Chose Cisco Duo
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 …
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco Duo was much better suited to integrate with our Citrix solution.
Chose Cisco Duo
We didn't evaluate any other MFA solutions to compare outside of using Keeper as a password vault but that works in conjunction with Cisco Duo.
Chose Cisco Duo
The organization chose Cisco Duo prior to the acquisition with its strong brand and reputation from the security community.
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco is one of our trusted solution vendors and Cisco Duo can be good integrated to our security landscape.
Chose Cisco Duo
It's more easy and user-friendly.
Chose Cisco Duo
Similar but priced quite well as part of a product suite.
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco Duo had an integrated method for handling MFA on Endpoints and Servers. This was a huge bonus. Administration and implementation seemed more efficient as well.
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco Secure Access by Duo is the best and most familiar. Users have no issues using it and it is a breeze to administer as well.
Chose Cisco Duo
There are Okta has that Duo does not have, however since my environment has CISCO solutions implemented and the service that we receive from the vendor and integrator is top quality, DUO was the right choice.
Chose Cisco Duo
We selected Cisco Secure Access by Duo due to its ability to interoperate with almost any on premise, cloud, or hybrid application or system. Duo also integrates nicely with our other security systems, including XDR. As well, Duo is a market leader and always pushing the sector …
Chose Cisco Duo
Cisco Secure Access by Duo's ability to integrate with a wide variety of SSO applications and systems, as well as its focus on usability, make it an attractive option.
Firebase
Chose Firebase
Supabase is more user-friendly especially since it is directly integrated with Lovable, one of the most popular AI coder for non-technical users.
Chose Firebase
Supabase seems to have the best of all worlds right now. Followed by MongoDB/Firebase for smaller projects requiring less manpower and resources. Azure and Microsoft are reserved for existing projects and larger corporate clients.
Chose Firebase
Although there are other backend platforms that could have provided us with a solution to our project. The way of grouping the solution in FIREBASE, atomizing in the same project the database, cloud functions, authentication, push notifications, etc., has given us a clearer …
Chose Firebase
Unlike other tools in the GCP suite that have an equivalent in other clouds such as Bigquery (Athenas on AWS), AI Platform (Sagemaker), Storage (S3), we do not find an equivalent as complete as Firebase in any other provider. This is the main reason why we chose this provider …
Chose Firebase
Firebase came to a multiuse case for our product for authenticating backend services, users on the app & get data on the user base using the dashboard.
Chose Firebase
Firebase has a single NoSQL database, it is a simple, powerful and uniform application development platform in connectors, it has multiple programming languages ​​such as JavaScript and necessary tools that will simplify the creation of applications.
Chose Firebase
Firebase poses great documentation and integration with Android devices. And it's very good as well for iOS ones. So, for these scenarios, Firebase becomes the ideal ally.
Chose Firebase
It eases the app development process, has an extensive database that allows you to store media files in the cloud, supports robust uploads and downloads, and login authentication on any platform.
Chose Firebase
PostgreSQL is a relational database and is well suited for complex applications, however, Firebase is well suited for light and faster applications.
Chose Firebase
Firebase is easy to manage and scale really well for web application services. It offers better authentication and is easy to implement. For real-time analytics on web applications, it works very well. Firebase offers more features compared to other services especially it can …
Chose Firebase
  • User interface and console are very easy to understand
  • There is no pain in Integration with IOS, Android, and unity platforms
  • Cost-effective
Chose Firebase
We choose Firebase for various reasons:
  • A large set of resources and world-class Google support.
  • Pricing was a larger role in this decision.
Chose Firebase
If I get a suitable budget next year, I'll be switching us to Adobe Analytics. Their app/web tracking and the interface are streets ahead of Firebase.
Chose Firebase
Firebase is a much more comprehensive tool. While Fabric only had user traffic and trends data, it did not have the user communication set of tools. While CleverTap has CRM tools, it does not have tools for developers and product teams. While Adobe Analytics is good with …
Chose Firebase
I haven't played much with Heroku beyond deploying projects from Github. It looks to be very similar in providing a cloud-based platform for developing and deploying web apps as quickly as possible. I would look at comparing both of these before choosing a solution. I am just …
Chose Firebase
We chose Firebase for the following reasons.
  • Online resources.
  • Comes with better support.
Chose Firebase
Before using Firebase, we exclusively used self hosted database services. Using Firebase has allowed us to reduce reliance on single points of failure and systems that are difficult to scale. Additionally, Firebase is much easier to set up and use than any sort of self hosted …
Chose Firebase
Firebase does a lot of things well, but Branch.io does a lot of things great. We originally chose Firebase because it was free, had great crash reporting, and full event tracking. As we began to scale, increase paid marketing spend, and implement features such as journey …
Chose Firebase
It's tough to pick out competitors against Firebase as I'm really unsure and doubt there's another product exactly like it. As mentioned before Firebase literally does everything you can imagine for a mobile application but doesn't get insanely deep in one feature or action. It …
Chose Firebase
Firebase is well suited for projects with simpler database workloads that require its real-time features. For data that is heavily read in real time, it's a great choice and gives developers a lot of features that would have been complicated and time-consuming to build up front …
Best Alternatives
Cisco DuoFirebase
Small Businesses
WatchGuard AuthPoint
WatchGuard AuthPoint
Score 9.1 out of 10
Visual Studio
Visual Studio
Score 9.1 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
WatchGuard AuthPoint
WatchGuard AuthPoint
Score 9.1 out of 10
Visual Studio
Visual Studio
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
Microsoft Entra ID
Microsoft Entra ID
Score 8.7 out of 10
Visual Studio
Visual Studio
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco DuoFirebase
Likelihood to Recommend
9.4
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.9
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Availability
9.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.7
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
9.9
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Online Training
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Configurability
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
9.9
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
9.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
9.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
9.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco DuoFirebase
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco Duois is well suited in all kinds of scenarios where you need to ensure proper security measurements, I think. We can't just rely on our passwords only, as they can be easily stolen through phishing or data breaches thus keeping multi factor authentication is quite essential. I always prefer MFA or at least 2FA for any critical system.
Read full review
Firebase should be your first choice if your platform is mobile first. Firebase's mobile platform support for client-side applications is second to none, and I cannot think of a comparable cross-platform toolkit. Firebase also integrates well with your server-side solution, meaning that you can plug Firebase into your existing app architecture with minimal effort.
Firebase lags behind on the desktop, however. Although macOS support is rapidly catching up, full Windows support is a glaring omission for most Firebase features. This means that if your platform targets Windows, you will need to implement the client functionality manually using Firebase's web APIs and wrappers, or look for another solution.
Read full review
Pros
  • Speed - it's fast with almost no delay between triggering the MFA request and receiving the notification on an iPhone
  • Security - in addition to the added MFA layer, a simple, 4-digit passcode can be added to the authentication request
  • Ease of use - it doesn't scare users. It's simple to install, configure, and use.
Read full review
  • Extremely robust. Has about any tool you can think of under one roof making it extremely useful as a backup platform for data analytics or small teams that need something quickly.
  • Intuitive and easy UI/UX. Being made and owned by Google, you expect nothing less. Very easy to use for anyone that has any marketing or analytical experience especially in Google Analytics (which I just assume all marketers do).
  • Safe, secure, and sturdy. Never need to worry about downtimes or misinformation as it's as clean and safe as it is being run by Google.
  • FREE! What else is there to say. Unless you're an extremely large application handling hundreds of thousands to millions of users, this pay as you go plan will stay free.
Read full review
Cons
  • 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.
Read full review
  • Firebase/Firestore has very limited support for querying more complicated items; for example, performing a simple string search is not possible.
  • While upfront costs are low, costs can grow quickly if you're not careful about what you are being billed for.
  • Dashboards have at times shown different information to what is billed, and support from Google is less than stellar and not as effective as that from Amazon or Microsoft.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
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.
Read full review
Firebase functions are more difficult to use, there are no concepts of triggers or cascading deletes without the use of Firebase functions. Firebase functions can run forever if not written correctly and cause billing nightmares. While this hasn't happened to us specifically it is a thing that happens more than one realizes.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
We do not see any degradation of performance of the protected applications. There are occasional lags in receiving the push but no show stooppers.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Since it’s a reputable company, I have received technical support when needed and I trust that if anything else happens I can contact them with any issues. I haven’t experienced bad customer service and I totally feel supported while using this authentication method. No complains so far and the high rating!
Read full review
Our analytics folks handled the majority of the communication when it came to customer service, but as far as I was aware, the support we got was pretty good. When we had an issue, we were able to reach out and get support in a timely fashion. Firebase was easy to reach and reasonably available to assist when needed.
Read full review
In-Person Training
There was no in person training but checking the box was the only way I could complete all of the questions.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Online Training
This was not organized training but the videos that Duo provides to teach you how to install a particular integration are top notch.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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 support / tech group we depend on outside Cisco support. That support is already here for us, so we stayed with a Cisco product.
Read full review
Before using Firebase, we exclusively used self hosted database services. Using Firebase has allowed us to reduce reliance on single points of failure and systems that are difficult to scale. Additionally, Firebase is much easier to set up and use than any sort of self hosted database. This simplicity has allowed us to try features that we might not have based on the amount of work they required in the past.
Read full review
Scalability
So far, the only limits we've encountered were tied to our imagination. Duo's strong list of supported integrations is amazing.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • It's one of those things that only costs money in the sense of you have to convince a leadership team to spend money to save money, right? Like a compromise is far more expensive than duo paying for duo. So specifically it's really just about trying to prevent problems. And so while it costs money and we don't have a direct return on investment that we can point out immediately, I would still always advocate for it just because it keeps security. Paying for security is cheaper than getting compromised essentially.
Read full review
  • Firebase has been able to help us understand reliably, the drop-off in our user flows with their funnel feature. This has made it easy for us to be able to pinpoint weaknesses in our funnel and test and optimize with data as the dependent variable.
  • From an economic standpoint, we don't pay for Firebase which is great, but as the saying goes "You get what you pay for" also holds true in this context. As we looked to grow and scale, we looked for a paid solution.
  • From a developer resource standpoint, Firebase has been extremely easy to integrate into our app. Whether it be the event tracking, dynamic links or crash reporting we have not had to waste too much developer time thanks to their well-organized developer docs.
Read full review
ScreenShots