Cipher vs Kroll
Cipher and Kroll are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Cipher targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while Kroll serves SMB, Mid-market, and Enterprise. Cipher includes 0 attack surfaces in base pricing (), compared to 5 for Kroll (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network).
Buyer brief
Cipher and Kroll are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Cipher targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while Kroll serves SMB, Mid-market, and Enterprise. Cipher includes 0 attack surfaces in base pricing (), compared to 5 for Kroll (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network).
Kroll offers broader coverage (5 surfaces vs. 0). Cipher may suit teams that need depth over breadth.
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Mid-market and enterprise buyers that want a managed service layered over existing security tools | Organizations wanting IR expertise built into MDR with 3,000+ annual cases feeding detection |
| Price | Custom quote | Unverified MDR field estimate: $30K-$200K+/yr |
| Response authority | 0/6 actions · Approval required | 6/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Works with existing stack | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Warranty | None listed | $1,000,000 |
- Best fit
- Mid-market and enterprise buyers that want a managed service layered over existing security tools
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 0/6 actions · Approval required
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- Organizations wanting IR expertise built into MDR with 3,000+ annual cases feeding detection
- Price
- Unverified MDR field estimate: $30K-$200K+/yr
- Response authority
- 6/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- $1,000,000
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | CipherTECH-AGNOSTIC | KrollTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| Fit | ||
| Target size | Mid-market, Enterprise | SMB, Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Mixed | Positive |
| Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | Customer EDR | CrowdStrike FalconMicrosoft DefenderSentinelOne |
| SIEM integrations | None listed | Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: LimitedCloudCloud: LimitedIDIdentity: Not coveredSaaSSaaS: Not coveredNetNetwork: LimitedOTOT/IoT: Not covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Optional add-on |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Guided Response | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Approval Required | Configurable |
| Response actions | Alert and notify only | IsolateKill processContainDisable accountsQuarantineCustom playbooks |
| IR included | Separate | ✓ Included |
| Cost | ||
| Price range | Not published | Not publicly disclosed. Unverified field estimates suggest $30K-$200K+/year depending on scope. |
| Minimum seats | None | None |
| Breach warranty | – | $1,000,000 |
| More details | ||
| Requires own agent | No | No |
| Endpoints | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Cloud workloads | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Identity | Not offered | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | Not offered | ✓ Included |
| Network | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| OT/ICS | Not offered | + Optional |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Custom quote. Cipher does not publish xMDR package pricing. | Custom quote-based pricing, not publicly disclosed |
| Hidden cost warnings | Cipher says xMDR works with the existing technology stack, so buyers should confirm which tools are included in the quote and what integration work is extra.. Public pages do not publish response SLAs, contract minimums or service-credit language.. The site names EDR and IPS/IDS integration but does not publish named vendor integrations.. Response wording is broad, so buyers should document pre-approved actions before go-live. | CrowdStrike Falcon Complete migration (Dec 2025) increases platform dependency, customers wanting vendor-agnostic EDR lose that flexibility. Named TAM support (vs. Shared TAM) likely incurs additional cost, cost delta not disclosed. No published minimum seat requirements or pricing, likely enterprise-focused |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Custom, xMDR Services, xMDR Platform | Annual, Multi-year |
| Channels | Portal | EmailPortalPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | – | ✓ |
| SOC regions | North AmericaEuropeLATAM | North AmericaEuropeAsia-Pacific |
| Onboarding | Cipher advertises 20 days for full service activation, but buyers should confirm scope and contract timing. | Varies by environment complexity |
| Industry focus | HealthcareProfessional ServicesPayments | Financial ServicesHealthcareGovernmentRetailTechnologyEducation |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | No meaningful MDR-specific buyer-review signal was found in major English-language review communities during this pass. The public buyer case rests on Cipher's Prosegur ownership, xMDR Platform, 24/7 SOC claim, six-SOC footprint, portal access and existing-stack positioning. Buyers should validate pricing, response authority, named integrations and SOC delivery details directly. | Trusted for deep IR pedigree and Complete Response methodology. Gartner Peer Insights 4.6/5 (26 reviews). KuppingerCole MDR Leader 2023. Lower market visibility than pure-play MDR brands (~0.4% PeerSpot mindshare). December 2025 CrowdStrike migration generates mixed reactions around vendor lock-in. |
| Compliance | ISO 27001ISO 22301ISO 20000ISO 9001SOC 1SOC 2PCI DSSCREST | SOC 2 Type IIISO 27001PCI DSS |
| Certifications | ISO 27001ISO 22301ISO 20000ISO 9001SOC ISOC IIPCI QSAPCI ASVCRESTTF-CSIRTCIPHER-CSIRT RFC2350 | SOC 2 Type IIISO 27001CREST |
| Founded | – | 1972 |
| Data retention | Cipher says all platform information is online 24/7 and available from any device. No public standard MDR data-retention period was found. | Not publicly disclosed. |
| API available | – | ✓ |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between Cipher and Kroll?
Cipher is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Kroll is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Cipher covers 0 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 5 for Kroll.
How do Cipher and Kroll differ in response capabilities?
Cipher supports 0 autonomous actions (none) and requires approval before acting. Kroll supports 6 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine, network containment, process termination) and approval is configurable. Incident response is not included with Cipher and included with Kroll.
How does Cipher pricing compare to Kroll?
Cipher pricing: Not published. Kroll pricing: Not publicly disclosed. Unverified field estimates suggest $30K-$200K+/year depending on scope.. Watch for with Cipher: Cipher says xMDR works with the existing technology stack, so buyers should confirm which tools are included in the quote and what integration work is extra.; Public pages do not publish response SLAs, contract minimums or service-credit language.. Watch for with Kroll: CrowdStrike Falcon Complete migration (Dec 2025) increases platform dependency, customers wanting vendor-agnostic EDR lose that flexibility; Named TAM support (vs. Shared TAM) likely incurs additional cost, cost delta not disclosed.
Should I choose Cipher or Kroll?
Choose Cipher if: mid-market and enterprise buyers that want a managed service layered over existing security tools. Choose Kroll if: organizations wanting IR expertise built into MDR with 3,000+ annual cases feeding detection. Cipher is not ideal for buyers that need public MDR pricing before sales. Kroll is not ideal for organizations that need vendor-agnostic EDR choice (CrowdStrike migration reduces flexibility).
Daylight Security
AI-native MDR for buyers comparing active remediation across endpoint, cloud, identity, and SaaS. Daylight works with existing EDR/SIEM stacks and uses ChatOps-native collaboration, so it can be a useful third reference point in this comparison.