During our evaluation phase, we looked at Okta. For privileged access and for our authentication protocols like RADIUS and TACACS, Okta didn't have that functionality. They did SAML, so you could secure web apps or SaaS platforms or anything like that, but not our internal data center networking infrastructure. Duo Security was the only one that really had that capability. It was a really quick process. It's been great ever since.

We did evaluate other options. Since it was so long ago, I can't remember which other ones we looked at, but I do remember they were not as easy to implement.

We chose Duo Security for its ease of implementation and the number of applications that they are integrated with.

Duo brings in another application for users to deal with. Whereas, Microsoft integrates with their single authentication stack, allowing us to handle their own personal banking accounts and personal two-factor authentication needs in one app. This isn't Duo's strength, and it's not what we see Google and Microsoft doing out in the cloud.

Single-pane-of-glass management is important for us, but not critical, because fewer management points are better. Duo didn't provide a single pane of glass because of our different application stacks. Whereas, at least Microsoft Authenticator has allowed us to deal with most applications as well as their deep integration with Office.

Duo needs to adopt the same kinds of concepts that we see from all the major authentication tools, such as Google Authenticator, Microsoft Authenticator, third-party password tools like Bitwarden, and Secret Server from Delinea. All of these are beginning to incorporate more functions into them as a single security tool,  protecting me with authentication codes and six-digit codes that interact with Google, Microsoft, and any of those vendors as part of the tool. There are more functions, fewer tools, and less user impact, which are all benefits. I don't think Duo showed us that as a single tool. Duo did its job really well, but there are many jobs that have to be done.

I don't exactly remember which other solutions we considered, but we used G2's platform's reports to evaluate them.

We had an option to use Google Authenticator. It is also a secure solution but we chose Duo Security because it was recommended to us, and it has been acquired by Cisco.

We tested a SecureAuth solution that didn't meet our security standards. We wanted to try RSA Authentication Manager, but that was more complex for users, so we decided to go with Duo Security.

We evaluated RSA, Microsoft, and Duo Security. We evaluated these three, and we realized that Duo Security had better reviews, and it was easier to deploy and cost-effective, so it made sense to use it.

We did look at some other products. We had a security manager who was responsible for conducting the necessary research and legwork. However, he did present us with a few different solutions, and our network manager was also involved in exploring options. Ultimately, Duo Security was selected as the preferred solution.

And also, what happened right before then, we had attended Cisco Live, had been exposed to Cisco Duo, and really liked what we saw. So we went into it with a bit of bias, to be honest, because we already saw it.

The reason we chose Duo Security over its competitors is because it's a freebie that you can try and see how it goes. There is also the ease of integration with Duo Security. I don't really know of any other MFA that is as simple. With Duo Security, it's like, here's your authorization, and you need to click on the yes or no options.

We evaluated Microsoft's two-factor authentication. Other than that, we pretty much went straight for Duo just because we were in that ecosystem already. We didn't want to embrace Microsoft stuff. This was a better fit for what we needed. We were already in the Cisco ecosystem.

The Microsoft solution was also a bit limited. We were less likely to wire other devices. It was for Microsoft products at that time, but I don't know if it's changed.

Duo Security considers all resources to be external. That was a part of the reason we adopted it. That was the main difference between the Microsoft solution and this one. We've integrated it with single sign-on. It's good.

We shopped around for other layers of security but I don't think we specifically shopped around for the authentication piece. When we looked at everything, and the dust settled, this was the easiest piece to put on top of what we had and to give us another layer of security.

We may have evaluated other options at a surface level, but we didn't really go too deeply into them. We pretty much went with Duo out the gate.

We also evaluated Unify. Cisco is the leader and we started with Cisco. It's good, so we stay with it.

We're a Cisco partner, so once the two-factor requirement kicked in and became mandatory for our customers' cyber insurance, we just gravitated right to the Cisco solution.

The proofs of value that we've done are really what sells it. You put it in, get them using it, and then you just buy the license and you don't have to go back.

It's pretty easy to use as two-factor authentication systems go. We evaluated a few others, including the Microsoft two-factor authentication, a little bit, and one other, and Duo ended up being our favorite. Part of that was because we're in that Cisco ecosystem and we were able to integrate it with our other services that are all cloud-based. It fit in pretty well for us, and it would for anybody with a similar setup.

Duo was also the least obtrusive to the user and the ease of administration through the administrative portal was a little better.

We evaluated lots of options from different vendors.

We evaluated Microsoft Authenticator and Google Authenticator. With those solutions, you don't have the granularity of management of the MFA environment that Duo offers.

We looked briefly at Okta Verify. It is the Verify app from Okta to use a single sign-on provider. It had the same price but far less functionality. It was a no-brainer to just go with Duo Security.

We checked other options but because of the stability of the product and the length of time it's been on the market, we chose Duo Security. The things you need to weigh up are the size of the company, stability, and price.