We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and Lumu based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Previously, anyone in the organization would see any data point in the wall. They could just go and connect their machine with that data point and could access the network. But now, even if someone came and tried that, they will not be given access."
"The Intrusion Firewall is a valuable feature."
"Technical support for this solution is very good."
"There is a positive impact on security, particularly the intrusion feature, which helps keep the solution concealed and secure."
"The most valuable features are DNS service and shell self-service within a network."
"Cisco is head-and-shoulders above all of the competition when it comes to technical support."
"Cisco IOS Security is very robust and works very well."
"Cisco IOS Security is a mature product with extensive capabilities, serving as the base for the defense layer. It offers good network visibility, which helps in rapid response through the Rapid Threat Containment feature. Its deployment and configuration are straightforward."
"Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time."
"It's been helpful for overall extended network visibility."
"You can access external links, playbooks, MITRE Matrix, and a lot of information."
"Most of it is automated, so I do not have to watch it to get alerts."
"The context provided by the tool is very complete, it includes the miter matrix, playbooks, links, hashes, and much more."
"Cisco very slowly introduces and implements the products, unlike other brands."
"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."
"Cisco IOS Security could improve by having more compatibility with other Cisco solutions."
"In the security portfolio from Cisco, the issue is marketing. Cisco is still seen primarily as an enterprise network player rather than being acknowledged as a security vendor."
"There are the usual bugs that are inherent to some software upgrades. Sometimes this provides some unexpected issues, however, it happens with all brands all the time."
"There could be a bit more functions on offer that could make it easier to use."
"The solution is complex and can be more user-friendly."
"The reports need improvement."
"The integration with different vendors and endpoints could be improved."
"Nothing so far needs to be improved."
"I am happy with the current features. However, one important one is to improve the reports."
"It would be good if we could access the physical logs."
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 10th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 47 reviews while Lumu is ranked 14th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 5 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while Lumu is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Lumu writes "Protects against threats and handles it in time with moderate pricing". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS and Netgate pfSense, whereas Lumu is most compared with ExtraHop Reveal(x), Stellar Cyber Open XDR, LogRhythm NDR, Darktrace and Fortinet FortiGate IPS. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. Lumu report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.
