Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Lumu vs Trellix Network Detection and Response comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Lumu
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
8th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (10th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (18th)
Trellix Network Detection a...
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Network Detection and Response (NDR) category, the mindshare of Lumu is 3.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Network Detection and Response is 2.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Detection and Response (NDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Juan Solano - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects against threats and handles it in time with moderate pricing
Mostly, Lumu is an automatic tool. We'll deploy on firewalls and DNS servers. Lumu detects every attack on our network. The other day, we had CLC, the command controller, and the tool reacted automatically. It detected the attack and immediately blocked it without intervention from my team. The improvement is in the security process, as it's now entirely automated. We no longer require a technician or engineer to monitor our network 24/7. Lumu updates with AI and global threat intelligence, which greatly assists us. Since our workload is lighter, Lumu handles all of our tasks. We're using FortiGate for the firewall and Kaspersky for endpoints. If you are going to Lumu, you need another solution for the endpoint. You need to integrate with other tools like firewalls or another antivirus. I recommend the solution based on the price, usability, and service offered by the solution. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
BiswabhanuPanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one
The in-depth investigation capabilities are a major advantage. When the system flags something as malicious, it provides a packet capture of that activity within the environment. That helps my team quickly identify additional context that most other tools wouldn't offer – like source IP or base64 encoded data. We can also see DNS requests and other details that aren't readily available in solutions like Check Point or others that we've tried. The detection itself is solid, and their sandboxing is powerful. There's a learning curve – you need a strong grasp of OS-level changes, process forking, registry changes, and the potential impact of those. But with that knowledge, the level of information Trellix provides is far greater than what we've seen elsewhere. The real-time response capability of Trellix has been quite effective, although it's not very fast. The key is this solution's concept of 'preference zero.' They don't immediately act on a zero-day. For example, the solution has seen a piece of malware for the first time. It'll let it in, then do sandboxing. Maybe after four or five minutes, it identifies that specific file's DNX Secure Store as malicious. At that point, they update the static analysis engine, and it gets detected if anything else tries to download the same file. There is that initial 'preference zero' concept, like with Panda. You may not hold traffic in the network. That's standard in the industry; we don't do much about it. To address that, we also have endpoint solutions. We use SentinelOne in our environment, which helps us identify threats like Western Bureaus and others.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Most of it is automated, so I do not have to watch it to get alerts."
"Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time."
"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."
"The context provided by the tool is very complete, it includes the miter matrix, playbooks, links, hashes, and much more."
"You can access external links, playbooks, MITRE Matrix, and a lot of information."
"It's been helpful for overall extended network visibility."
"The tool's support team helps partners resolve any problems with the product."
"Support is very helpful and responsive."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"The sandbox feature of FireEye Network Security is very good. The operating system itself has many features and it supports our design."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"Its ability to find zero-day threats, malware and anything malicious has greatly improved my customer's organization, especially for protecting the users' browser."
"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."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
"Trellix NDR provides an essential defense by automatically responding to network incidents that firewalls may not catch."
 

Cons

"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."
"Lumu's ability to discover threats is an area of concern where improvements are needed."
"Nothing so far needs to be improved."
"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."
"FireEye Network Security should have better integration with other vendors' firewalls or proxies, such as Palo Alto and Fortinet. Files that are being submitted should happen through the API or automatically."
"I heard that FireEye recently was hacked, and a lot of things were revealed. We would like FireEye to be more secure as an organization. FireEye has to be more protective because it is one of the most critical devices that we are using in our environment. They have a concept called SSL decryption, but that is only the packet address. We would like FireEye to also do a lot of decryption inside the packet. Currently, FireEye only does encryption and decryption of the header, but we would like them to do encryption and decryption of the entire packet."
"It would be great if we could create granular reports based on the protocols, types of attacks, regions of attack, etc. Also we would like to easily be able to add exceptions to rules in cases of false positives."
"The initial setup was complex because of the nature of our environment. When it comes to the type of applications and functions which we were looking at in terms of identifying malicious threats, there would be some level of complexity, if we were doing it right."
"They can maybe consider supporting some compliance standards. When we are configuring rules and policies, it can guide whether they are compliant with a particular compliance authority. In addition, if I have configured some rules that have not been used, it should give a report saying that these rules have not been used in the last three months or six months so that I disable or delete those rules."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
"If you want to search the hashes in the environment, you need to put in IOCs one by one, making it a very hectic job."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The tool is available at a good price. The tool offers a good and competitive price for customers."
"FireEye is comparable to other products, such as HX, but seems expensive. It may cause us to look at other products in the market."
"The tool is a bit pricey."
"Pricing and licensing are reasonable compared to competitors."
"When I compare this solution to its competitors in the market, I find that it is a little expensive."
"The pricing is a little high."
"When you purchase FireEye Network Security NX, will need to purchase a megabit per second package. You must know your needs from day one."
"There are some additional services that I understand the vendor provides, but our approach was to package all of the features that we were looking to use into the product."
"Its price is a bit high. A small customer cannot buy it. Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Detection and Response (NDR) solutions are best for your needs.
842,651 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Lumu?
Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time.
What needs improvement with Lumu?
Lumu's ability to discover threats is an area of concern where improvements are needed.
What is your primary use case for Lumu?
My company is currently dealing with Lumu's onboarding process. Lumu is used to monitor the environment permanently and validate if there is ransomware that can exploit our infrastructure.
What do you like most about FireEye Network Security?
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 an...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Network Security?
While I do not handle pricing directly, it is known that there is a variety of customers with different licensing needs, which depends on the organization's size and policy.
What needs improvement with FireEye Network Security?
The Trellix solution could be improved by enhancing the Central Management Console for faster visibility, which would help in network detection response. Networking often involves complexity that c...
 

Also Known As

No data available
FireEye Network Security, FireEye
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
FFRDC, Finansbank, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Investis, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Bank of Thailand, City of Miramar, Citizens National Bank, D-Wave Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,651 professionals have used our research since 2012.