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.
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 …
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.
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.
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 …
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.
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.
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 …
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 …
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.