We compared Appgate SDP and Duo Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Appgate SDP requires a more intricate setup process, but it offers flexibility, resilience, and powerful configuration options. It is considered costly and lacks user-friendly interface. Conversely, Duo Security has a simple setup, provides two-factor authentication, and is commended for its simplicity and time-saving advantages. It faces some compatibility and integration difficulties, but offers affordable pricing and a favorable return on investment. Customer service and support receive high praise for both products.
"It is a scalable solution...The support answers your questions very fast."
"The interface is really friendly. It's simple to understand."
"One of the most important features is stopping lateral movement across our network."
"It is pretty stable."
"The simplicity of the SDP platform is a standout feature; instead of navigating through intricate details, users can seamlessly connect to the company's network or switch to the internet with minimal effort."
"The flexibility of the tool is valuable. It is very robust. It has a very robust configuration capability."
"The single pane of glass management is very important and it is part of the reason we went with Duo. Anything we can do to save time for our administrators, help desk staff, and engineers, is valuable to us."
"They are users who, as mentioned before, utilize RDPAP and MDPAP. It includes functionalities related to finance, specifically in single sign-on."
"The flexibility is the most valuable feature. We use it for the app on the phone. When we're at different locations, the phone is usually there, so we can use that. It has just been a very flexible option."
"Regarding the valuable features, I would say that Duo Security is easy to use, has speed, and is dependable."
"The most valuable aspect is the authentication and the SSO."
"The product is reliable and easy to use."
"We're working remotely. It helps us keep people more safe. Its adoption has been fine. I like the fact that you can bypass it if you need to because there are situations where the internet doesn't work, etc."
"By deploying Duo, we have virtually eliminated the risk of direct deposit redirection as a result of credentials that have been compromised via phishing."
"It would be better to connect to an application portal from any device. Documentation and support could be better."
"One thing that kind of sticks out to me is the ability to do a proper non-split tunnel. VPN tunnel-wise, it is not really a true unsplit tunnel, but I think that's just because of the way it's designed. A split VPN basically allows your system to talk to other systems without being forced down the tunnel. A VPN running in a non-split tunnel mode forces all the traffic down the tunnel to wherever you're VPNing to. It forces the traffic down so that the traffic is subject to the firewall and rules that you have in your corporate environment and such. It helps to prevent remote malicious folks that may be talking directly to that box from piggybacking into the corporate environment through it. They do it partially, but it would be nice to see more of an enterprise-level solution there."
"On the cloud, when you make some changes, it may be difficult."
"The user interface should be improved as it is not very easy to work with the updates."
"One limitation is that it's harder to provide access to multiple applications in the company with Appgate, but that's probably because of poor management."
"They could provide a single-box solution to manage tools for 4000 users. Additionally, they could add extra features to enhance remote micro connection."
"One area that might be improved is that setting up SMS texting is not as easy as using the app, even though it does support it."
"The new smart license model doesn't always work. It's very complicated."
"Integration with a product such as Microsoft Sentinel would be great. As the product continually improves, I'm unsure if this feature is available."
"Most of my colleagues from other companies use the Microsoft MFA solution because it's included in Office 365. Few people are considering Cisco Duo. That's the primary problem in our area. It's a solution mostly adopted by Cisco users."
"Reducing or eliminating the "telephony credits" system used by Duo would be great."
"We use Yubikey for pushing it to the phones. Yubikeys can get expensive because people tend to lose those for some reason. Fifty dollars a device is pretty high."
"I would like to see some features simplified, such as securing, configuring, and implementing Microsoft Remote Desktop. Other than that, the solution was rock solid throughout my time administering it."
"Integration between Duo Security and FTDs needs improvement. Integrating Next Generation Firewall safety with Duo Security currently requires a proxy agent between Active Directory and the appliance. It's an additional factor that we need to think about. It would be great to have direct integration with FTD so that we don't have to worry about middleware products. For the rest of the Cisco Secure solutions, the APIs need improvement."
Appgate SDP is ranked 10th in ZTNA as a Service with 6 reviews while Cisco Duo is ranked 3rd in ZTNA as a Service with 55 reviews. Appgate SDP is rated 8.8, while Cisco Duo is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Appgate SDP writes "Helps us manage traffic-related issues and streamlines access management for the network ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Duo writes "Helps reduce the risk of a breach and is easy to deploy and onboard". Appgate SDP is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Waverley Labs Open Source Software Defined Perimeter and Netskope Private Access, whereas Cisco Duo is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiToken, Yubico YubiKey and UserLock. See our Appgate SDP vs. Cisco Duo report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors and best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
