Cisco IOS Security vs Lumu comparison

"Cisco IOS Security has many good features, but compared to other solutions, it has a more user-friendly interface with steps to apply and manage rules. Another good part of the solution is that it's more straightforward."

"We use Cisco IOS Security mostly for routers to route off the firewall. It's a next-generation device."

"The most valuable features of Cisco IOS Security are the plenty of functionality it provides, many people are IT certified the usage, and the user interface is good."

"One of the main features is that the hardware is extremely reliable."

"The technical is excellent."

"The most valuable feature is the scalability. The nice thing with the bigger vendors is that they're very good at scale."

"Technical support for this solution is very good."

"I'm able to transfer data over internet network security. With the GRE I'm able to transfer data within one bunch to another bunch in a public way, like the internet. The communication is encrypted and is private. It gives me added privacy."

"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."

"I like Lumu's simple user interface. When we deployed it, we got full access, allowing us to identify IP addresses on the network and connect machine names to users. It helped us identify and block threats via the firewall. I also appreciate the chat support and ticket closure process. We're currently reviewing network detection solutions, and my recommendations include Lumu, Sentinel, and a few others. Regarding functionality and user-friendliness, I would recommend Lumu over the others."

"It's been helpful for overall extended network visibility."

"Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time."

"Most of it is automated, so I do not have to watch it to get alerts."

"I would love it if it has a link-by-link feature, integration with Unified Threat Management (UTM), and load balancers. They haven't got any link-by-link feature right now, which can be a very attractive option. This link-by-link feature can also be made available for Cisco's UTM firewalls. The link-by-link feature is available in some of the other firewalls. Currently, integration with UTM is missing. Cisco IOS Security also doesn't have the load balancers and a few things that need to be done to get a good UTM firewall. Normally, other firewalls have UTM. As a next-generation firewall, it's good, but as a UTM, it has to do some work."

"The graphical user interface or the GUI could be better. Beginners can use some devices with the GUI, but some security devices are configured using CLI. It would also be better if it had its own Intrusion Protection Service and Intrusion Detection Service on the server."

"The solution’s setup process could be better."

"The user interface needs to be improved."

"We faced significant challenges related to licensing issues, particularly when licenses expire."

"Cisco IOS Security should improve its functionalities."

"Cisco IOS Security could improve its security features. There are competitors that have some additional security features, such as Fortinet FortiGate. Additionally, there should be better synchronization with Cisco IOS Security and other vendors, and improved AI features would be beneficial."

"Signatures and other critical definitions need to be updated more frequently."

"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 free version is minimal compared to the full version."

"It would be good if we could access the physical logs."

"The reports need improvement."

"It is necessary to pay for a license in order to use the solution. It is on a yearly basis and the price is high."

"We can purchase its licenses as per specific business requirements."

"The pricing is average and includes all features with support."

"The solution's pricing is very good."

"The tool could be priced lower. If you want advanced services, then you need to purchase them."

"Palo Alto networks are more expensive than this solution and this is why you will see more products like this one in Mexico."

"You can get a better price if you commit to a longer-term license. Three years, five years, or even seven or ten years will be cheaper than a three-month or one-year term."

"The cost of the license, to the best of my knowledge, is approximately two thousand dollars."

"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."