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
Passly by ID Agent
Score 2.3 out of 10
N/A
Passly from ID Agent, a Kaseya company and the service that replaces the former AuthAnvil, is an identity and access management (IAM) platform providing two-factor authentication, single sign-on (SSO) and password management.
N/A
Pricing
Cisco Duo
Passly by ID Agent
Editions & Modules
Duo Essentials
$3
per month per user
Duo Advantage
$6
per month per user
Duo Premier
$9
per month per user
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Duo
Passly by ID Agent
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Duo
Passly by ID Agent
Features
Cisco Duo
Passly by ID Agent
Identity Management
Comparison of Identity Management features of Product A and Product B
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.
From my experience, Kaseya made a mistake with Passly. It does not work correctly. When it does work it is very delayed causing issues for logging into the system. When Kaseya was contacted they could not find users at all. When they finally found the users they could not edit it needing them to escalate to development to fix accounts.
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.
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.
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!
They are very helpful with helping us with any issues. There are a lot of helpful guides online if you get lost. Kaseya is also good about not bugging you with notifications. Kaseya offers easy to access to support options. Overall I have not had to contact them over a lot of issues. The software rarely broke or was down for maintenance.
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.
We have transitioned our Multi-Factor authentication processes to use either Authy, Duo, or Microsoft Authenticator, depending on the application use-case. We still have some clients using AuthAnvil, but it is no longer our preferred application for MFA. The other offerings in the market fulfill the same requirement with either lower or no additional cost and are easier to manage and more consistent in their performance.
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.
Using AuthAnvil to log into Kaseya VSA multiple times was definitely a loss in productivity.
AuthAnvil did provide lots of security for our products because everyone would be deterred by AuthAnvil and Kaseya VSA's labyrinth-like log in process.
