Hitachi Cyber vs InfoGuard
Hitachi Cyber and InfoGuard are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Hitachi Cyber targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while InfoGuard serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Hitachi Cyber includes 6 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS), compared to 4 for InfoGuard (Endpoint, Cloud, Identity, Network).
Buyer brief
Hitachi Cyber and InfoGuard are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Hitachi Cyber targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while InfoGuard serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Hitachi Cyber includes 6 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS), compared to 4 for InfoGuard (Endpoint, Cloud, Identity, Network).
Hitachi Cyber offers broader coverage (6 surfaces vs. 4). InfoGuard may suit teams that need depth over breadth.
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with | Swiss, German and Austrian buyers that want MDR from DACH-based SOCs |
| Price | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 6/6 actions · Configurable | 1/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Works with existing stack | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Warranty | None listed | None listed |
- Best fit
- Existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 6/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- Swiss, German and Austrian buyers that want MDR from DACH-based SOCs
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 1/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | Hitachi CyberTECH-AGNOSTIC | InfoGuardTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| Fit | ||
| Target size | Mid-market, Enterprise | Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Mixed | Mixed |
| Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | CrowdStrikeSentinelOneMicrosoft Defender | Customer endpoint telemetry |
| SIEM integrations | Microsoft SentinelSplunkGoogle Chronicle | Customer log sources |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: LimitedNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Limited |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | IsolateKill processContainDisable accountsQuarantineCustom playbooks | Custom playbooks |
| IR included | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cost | ||
| Price range | Not published | Not published |
| Minimum seats | None | None |
| Breach warranty | – | – |
| More details | ||
| Requires own agent | No | No |
| Endpoints | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cloud workloads | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Identity | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| Network | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| OT/ICS | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Custom quote, not published. Sold direct. | Custom quote. InfoGuard does not publish MDR package pricing. |
| Hidden cost warnings | Pricing is fully custom, no public benchmarks to anchor negotiation. OT coverage routes through the new Krakow SOC and may change response timing if your assets sit elsewhere. Services span MDR, MSS and consulting under one roof, scope creep into adjacent services is easy | Public pages do not publish MDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.. Named autonomous response actions are not published, so response authority should be written into the contract.. InfoGuard offers both Managed SOC and Co-Managed SOC, so buyer-side staffing and responsibility can vary by model.. Data can stay at the customer premises or in Swiss data centres, which may change architecture and retention cost.. Incident Response Retainer exists as a separate offer, so buyers should confirm exactly what incident-response work is included in MDR. |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Annual, Multi-year | Custom, Managed SOC, Co-Managed SOC, Incident Response Retainer |
| Channels | EmailPortalPhone | PortalEmailPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | ✓ | – |
| SOC regions | North AmericaEuropeAsia-Pacific | Europe |
| Onboarding | Not published | InfoGuard's Cyber Defence brochure states 4 weeks for structured SOC onboarding. Buyers should confirm which log sources, sensors and response playbooks are included in that onboarding scope. |
| Industry focus | Financial ServicesEnergyManufacturingTransportationHealthcarePublic Sector | Financial ServicesInsuranceManufacturingEnergyHealthcareRetailService ProvidersPublic Sector |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | Hitachi Cyber has limited public review presence on G2, Gartner Peer Insights and PeerSpot for its MDR service specifically. Most independent coverage focuses on the Hitachi corporate parent or Above Security heritage rather than current customer experience. Buyers will need to lean on direct references. | No meaningful MDR-specific buyer-review signal was found in major English-language review communities during this pass. The public buyer case rests on InfoGuard's Swiss and German SOC delivery, 90+ SOC and CSIRT experts, open XDR platform, data-residency options and incident-response credentials. Buyers should validate pricing, response authority, named integrations and exact co-managed responsibilities directly. |
| Compliance | ISO 9001 (MSS)PCI QSA (Canada, US, LATAM, Caribbean)FIRST member | ISO 27001ISAE 3000 Type 2GDPRSwiss DSG |
| Certifications | ISO 9001PCI QSAFIRST | ISO/IEC 27001:2022ISO 14001ISAE 3000 Type 2-audited Cyber Defence CenterBSI-qualified APT Response service providerFIRST member |
| Founded | 1999 | 2001 |
| Data retention | Not published | InfoGuard says data is stored exclusively at the customer's premises or in its redundant data centres in Switzerland. No standard public MDR retention period was found. |
| API available | ✓ | – |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between Hitachi Cyber and InfoGuard?
Hitachi Cyber is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). InfoGuard is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Hitachi Cyber covers 6 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 4 for InfoGuard.
How do Hitachi Cyber and InfoGuard differ in response capabilities?
Hitachi Cyber supports 6 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine, network containment, process termination) and approval is configurable. InfoGuard supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and approval is configurable.
How does Hitachi Cyber pricing compare to InfoGuard?
Hitachi Cyber pricing: Not published. InfoGuard pricing: Not published. Watch for with Hitachi Cyber: Pricing is fully custom, no public benchmarks to anchor negotiation; OT coverage routes through the new Krakow SOC and may change response timing if your assets sit elsewhere. Watch for with InfoGuard: Public pages do not publish MDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.; Named autonomous response actions are not published, so response authority should be written into the contract..
Should I choose Hitachi Cyber or InfoGuard?
Choose Hitachi Cyber if: existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with. Choose InfoGuard if: swiss, German and Austrian buyers that want MDR from DACH-based SOCs. Hitachi Cyber is not ideal for buyers who need published SLA commitments or independently validated detection metrics. InfoGuard is not ideal for buyers that need public MDR pricing before sales.
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.