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
Zscaler Private Access
Score 7.9 out of 10
N/A
Zscaler Private Access™ (ZPA) gives users secure access to private apps and OT devices while enabling zero trust connectivity for workloads.
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.
Ivanti had its moment. However moving to Zscaler Private Access was the best decision for us. Zscaler Private Access is faster, smoother UI and has heaps of feature that, in my opinion, makes it tower over Ivanti. The authenticate early option, ensures we don't loose connection …
All of these tools are for different needs. Zscaler Private Access being for internal seems very simple as it really only allows filtering up to L4 whereas ZIA allows for filtering up to L7. ZDX often tries to give insight into the environment but since it only works with …
Zscaler Private Access was chosen
as trusted VPN system versus Cisco, due to better licensing model, more
flexible configuration of the security protocols, verification scenarios. Also it
We had a nightmare experience with Prisma Access. The tool was not the most intuitive, and their peripherals to make it more secure were not efficient. Their integration with other tools to provide MFA was mediocre at best. That is the main reason we decided to explore …
Well ZPA is a good solution, however everyone has their own advantage and disadvantages, with ZPA you can deploy ZTNA model, which will help you better control on access, however Palo Alto, Fortinet they are also market leading firewall solution, and you can not deny if they …
We originally used Cisco AnyConnect but when the pandemic hit and everyone started working remotely the Cisco VPN just couldn't handle the massive increase in users. The connection was unreliable both inability to connect and stay connected. It also seemed to include a lot more …
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.
The tool is, for the most part, very intuitive. Most of our issues so far (working through them with our Resident Engineer) are the one-off applications. We are working on some exemptions to make them functional. Besides that, the team loves the tool and how it can provide better security than our previous tool.
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.
Application Segmentation and Listener Configuration - The way applications are defined and listened for is fundamental to ZPA, but can be a source of frustration, especially when dealing with legacy or non-HTTP protocols
The ZCC is the user's primary gateway, but its control over local system network behavior can sometimes clash with enterprise requirements.
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.
Few things stand out. The ease of access: It very convenient - one click to open add details and done. Packet capture: Can't talk enough about this feature. Troubleshooting private access is always problematic,but this feature helped a lot. One thing that can be improved is early warning about expiring authentication
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!
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.
All of these tools are for different needs. Zscaler Private Access being for internal seems very simple as it really only allows filtering up to L4 whereas ZIA allows for filtering up to L7. ZDX often tries to give insight into the environment but since it only works with preconfigured items, that then means when a new problem shows up - ZDX isn't helpful troubleshooting postmortem. For the internal side of the house - Zscaler Private Access' strength is its simplicity to configure.
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.
Positive: We have now charged users internally for the service
Negative: Dealing with users who also have the Zscaler Client Connector for their company, can cause confusions
Negative: Enabling the Zscaler Internet Access entitlement has been a major headache for us because Zscaler Private Access users can't autheniticate through ZIA on a non corporate device.