We performed a comparison between Lumu and Trellix Network Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Detection and Response (NDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."You can access external links, playbooks, MITRE Matrix, and a lot of information."
"The context provided by the tool is very complete, it includes the miter matrix, playbooks, links, hashes, and much more."
"Most of it is automated, so I do not have to watch it to get alerts."
"It's been helpful for overall extended network visibility."
"Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time."
"Very functional and good for detecting malicious traffic."
"The scalability has not been a problem. We have deployed the product in very high bandwidth networks. We have never had a problem with the FireEye product causing latency issues within our networks."
"It allows us to be more hands off in checking on emails and networking traffic. We can set up a bunch of different alerts and have it alert us."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."
"We see ROI in the sense that we don't have to react because it stops anything from hurting the network. We can stop it before we have a bigger mess to clean up."
"We wanted to cross-reference that activity with the network traffic just to be sure there was no lateral movement. With Trellix, we easily confirmed that there was no lateral network involvement and that nothing else was infected. It helped us correlate the events and feel confident in our containment."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"I am happy with the current features. However, one important one is to improve the reports."
"The integration with different vendors and endpoints could be improved."
"Nothing so far needs to be improved."
"The reports need improvement."
"It would be good if we could access the physical logs."
"Cybersecurity posture has room for improvement."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"It doesn't connect with the cloud, advanced machine learning is not there. A known threat can be coming into the network and we would want the cloud to look up the problem. I would also like to see them develop more file replication and machine learning."
"There is a lot of room for Improvement in the offering, from cost to functionality. It is pretty straightforward to implement which is an advantage. However, it falls short in pricing, detection capabilities, and, most importantly, reporting and policy management."
"It is not a very secure product."
"It would be a good idea if we could get an option to block based upon the content of an email, or the content of a file attachment."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Lumu is ranked 6th in Network Detection and Response (NDR) with 5 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 7th in Network Detection and Response (NDR) with 36 reviews. Lumu is rated 9.8, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Lumu writes "Protects against threats and handles it in time with moderate pricing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Blocks traffic and DDoS attacks ". Lumu is most compared with ExtraHop Reveal(x), Stellar Cyber Open XDR, LogRhythm NDR, Darktrace and Fortinet FortiGate IPS, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate and Vectra AI. See our Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Network Detection and Response (NDR) vendors.
We monitor all Network Detection and Response (NDR) 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.
