We compared Duo Security and Cato Networks across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Based on the reviews, Duo Security is commended for its user-friendly setup process and extensive documentation. It offers valuable features like two-factor authentication, easy management, and integration capabilities. However, there are areas that need improvement, such as compatibility, user-specific permissions, technical support, and device insights. The pricing is fair and competitive, with positive ROI and satisfactory customer service. On the other hand, Cato Networks also has a straightforward setup process, but it lacks some security measures and advanced networking features. The pricing is considered expensive but profitable, with positive ROI and generally good customer support.
"The WAN aggregation feature is the most valuable."
"The solution is stable."
"Cato offers all the functionality found in other solution. The life cycle management is always very stable."
"We appreciate the optimization and acceleration of the performance of SDP users."
"The most valuable feature is that it also works as a next-gen firewall because it has security features."
"The most valuable feature of Cato Networks is the CASB and the documentation is useful."
"It's a cloud-based solution that integrates well with everything."
"The most valuable features of Cato Networks are the always-on VPN for remote workers and centralized management. Additionally, web filtering and antivirus are good."
"By deploying Duo, we have virtually eliminated the risk of direct deposit redirection as a result of credentials that have been compromised via phishing."
"Multifactor authentication and secure two-factor authentication are the most valuable features. It's been around for a while, but now it's becoming an enforced behavior as opposed to something that you used to do as optional."
"Duo has allowed us to add an additional layer of security to our organization and to establish trust for every access request and secures our environment."
"The app has greater stability than rival solutions such as Google Authenticator, and Duo Push authentication is a valuable feature."
"It meets our security needs very well. It is easy to use, and documentation is also available. It is also very stable and scalable, and its support is also very good. We are satisfied with this solution."
"Duo Security improved my organization by helping us secure all access points within the company infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature of Duo Security is the ability for the user to easily approve access. The application prompts the user, and they can see the location and the IP address. This makes it easy for the user to approve it and go through the process of logging in to the VPN."
"It's simple. It's reliable. I haven't had any issues with it."
"Cato Networks could improve their intrusion detection. There is not a lot in place."
"The price could be better."
"We would like the product to continue to improve its security."
"I would like to see better integration with identity providers."
"They should add more sophisticated security features. It should also be integrated into the cloud."
"A little tweaking or improvement of the UI in terms of logging when troubleshooting would be an improvement because it's very detailed."
"Its functionality is a bit limited in some areas as compared to a Cisco solution. It is not as granular. It doesn't have the manageability, feature set, and capabilities of a larger or an enterprise-level solution. It just needs a more robust feature set and granularity."
"The tool needs to be more granular. Its reports are not very in-depth."
"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."
"Certain customers can not use this product because it is cloud-based."
"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."
"Removing the need for a password would be a positive change as well as the ability to cover all the different enterprise applications. They don't have coverage for everything."
"Duo Security could be improved with the addition of more applications."
"Integration with a product such as Microsoft Sentinel would be great. As the product continually improves, I'm unsure if this feature is available."
"The pain point for us at one point was the Duo Authentication Proxy since we're on-premises and not in the cloud. We had to have a proxy machine that's in our DMZ to talk to Duo for us. The configuration of that was a little complicated."
"We have had instances where Duo Security stops working on a user's device, which we have fixed by uninstalling and then reinstalling it."
Cato SASE Cloud Platform is ranked 4th in ZTNA as a Service with 21 reviews while Cisco Duo is ranked 3rd in ZTNA as a Service with 55 reviews. Cato SASE Cloud Platform is rated 8.8, while Cisco Duo is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cato SASE Cloud Platform writes "Useful remote worker VPN, centralized management, and simple on-boarding process". 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". Cato SASE Cloud Platform is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco SD-WAN, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet FortiGate and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Cisco Duo is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiToken, Yubico YubiKey and UserLock. See our Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs. Cisco Duo report.
See our list of 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.