Lumu Reviews

Lumu offers competitive pricing, appealing to enterprise buyers who prioritize value over access to packet-level data. Users report costs around $90,000 annually or approximately $1,200 monthly, with some additional fees for threat actions. Compared to rivals like SentinelOne, Lumu is generally more affordable and can fit within various budgets, providing good value. Pricing is described as moderate, scoring a five out of ten in terms of expense.

• "The tool is available at a good price. The tool offers a good and competitive price for customers."
• "Compared to Lumu, other solutions are more expensive. SentinelOne was a bit cheaper, and another provider's price structure is unclear, but Lumu fit our budget nicely. SentinelOne's cost depends on the number of devices, and it might be similar to Lumu's, depending on deployment."
• "It is the cheapest solution we found."

Organizations primarily utilize Lumu to detect network threats, automate responses, and enhance visibility in hybrid environments. They leverage Lumu's API, integrations, and ease of use to efficiently manage cybersecurity tasks. It aids in analyzing network metadata, blocking threats missed by other tools, and extending security coverage across LAN, Wi-Fi, and servers. Many implement Lumu as a managed SOC, replacing MSPs, and appreciate its capability to serve as a SIEM and dashboard.

Customer service and support from Lumu are highly regarded. Assistance is prompt, with issues typically resolved quickly. Support teams, especially in Colombia, are praised for their effectiveness. During setup, users appreciated guidance from staff members like Sebastian. Minimal false positives and border issue identification enhance user satisfaction. Technical support is rated nine out of ten for value and reliability, offering dependable help when needed. Pricing is considered reasonable, providing excellent value for service received.

Lumu's initial setup is described as simple and quick, often plug-and-play. Many users report it takes minutes to start data flow, though full deployment can vary, with some completing it within a few hours and others requiring up to a month for extensive networks. Deployments involve minimal team members, and clear instructions facilitate ease. Users appreciate the tool's autonomous operation after setup, with minimal maintenance required.

Users express varied experiences about Lumu's scalability. While some report seamless deployment with no challenges, others mention difficulties when scaling to additional nodes, despite the simplicity in process integration. A segment of users found Lumu entirely scalable, easily deploying it across numerous devices. Conversely, some experienced frequent malfunctions upon expanding to larger networks, suggesting uncertainty about its capacity in larger infrastructures. Assessments range from very high to moderate, reflecting individual circumstances and IT environments.

Users rate Lumu's stability highly, consistently giving it ten out of ten. They report no trouble, lagging, crashing, or downtime. Even during maintenance periods, which occurred after midnight, no disruptions were experienced. With implementation for network monitoring and IT footprints, stability remains impressive. Organizations state there are no problems or incidents unless caused by themselves. Future deployments with more agents will offer further insight into its reliability across larger setups.