How It Works Use Cases Pricing Resources
Sign In Get Started for Free

Compare cybersecurity audit quotes in New York

New York's financial services sector operates under some of the most demanding cybersecurity regulations in the US. The NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation (23 NYCRR 500) mandates annual penetration testing, quarterly vulnerability assessments, and a written cybersecurity policy for all NY-licensed financial entities - and the DFS actively enforces it. Beyond financial services, NY-headquartered businesses face the NY SHIELD Act breach notification requirements and the full complexity of operating across states with 50 different breach notification laws. RFXapp lets you collect structured quotes and compare exactly what each security firm is testing and certifying, not just their day rate.

If you are looking for the best security firms in New York, the most reliable shortlist is one built around your own requirements and tested with a structured brief - not a generic ranked list. RFXapp helps you find and collect quotes from the right suppliers, and analyze them so you can compare what they actually offer, not just the headline price.

What do you need to buy? Describe it in your own words.

What to consider before you go to market

Getting comparable quotes starts with a well-scoped brief. These are the things most businesses overlook until they're already in the process.

NYDFS 23 NYCRR 500: mandatory testing for NY-licensed financial entities

If you hold a license from the New York Department of Financial Services - banks, insurance carriers, mortgage servicers, money transmitters, and others - the NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation imposes specific testing requirements: annual penetration testing and quarterly vulnerability assessments at minimum. The regulation also requires a CISO, a written cybersecurity policy, and an annual certification of compliance. Any security firm you engage for penetration testing should have documented experience with 23 NYCRR 500 requirements and produce reports in a format that satisfies DFS examination. Ask firms directly whether they have worked with NYDFS-regulated entities and reviewed their reports in examination.

Tester credentials: OSCP, GPEN, and GWAPT for penetration testing

The US does not have a direct equivalent to the UK's CREST accreditation scheme. The most widely recognized certifications for penetration testers are OSCP (Offensive Security Certified Professional), GPEN and GWAPT (GIAC certifications), CEH (EC-Council Certified Ethical Hacker), and CHFI for forensics. OSCP is widely regarded as the most rigorous, as it requires passing a practical 24-hour exam rather than multiple choice. For federal or government work, firms should also understand FedRAMP authorization and FISMA compliance testing. Ask for the specific certification held by the individual who will conduct your test - firm-level credentials mean little if the tester deployed on your engagement is uncertified.

SOC 2 Type II: the standard third-party attestation for enterprise clients

SOC 2 Type II is the most commonly requested security attestation in the US enterprise market. It is not a penetration test - it is a third-party audit of your controls across the Trust Services Criteria (Security, Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, and Privacy) over a defined period, typically 6 to 12 months. If your enterprise clients or investors require a SOC 2 report, you need a readiness assessment before the formal audit to identify control gaps. Many security firms offer SOC 2 readiness assessments, which are a separate service from penetration testing. Clarify upfront whether you need SOC 2 readiness support, a penetration test, or both - they are complementary but distinct.

Breach notification complexity: 50 state laws plus federal sector rules

The US does not have a single federal data breach notification law. Every state has its own law with different notification timelines, thresholds, and definitions. New York's SHIELD Act requires notification "in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay," with some guidance suggesting 30 days as a practical standard. California requires "expedient" notification with no specific timeline. HIPAA requires notification within 60 days for healthcare breaches. A cybersecurity audit firm working with multi-state operators should help you map your breach notification obligations across every state where you hold customer data - not just New York. If a firm cannot discuss this, they are not equipped to advise a multi-state business.

CMMC for defense contractors: a separate and mandatory pathway

If your business is part of the DoD supply chain, the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) framework is not optional - it is a contract requirement. CMMC Level 1 requires self-assessment against 17 basic practices; Level 2 requires a third-party assessment by a C3PAO (CMMC Third-Party Assessor Organization). Selecting a security firm that is not authorized to conduct CMMC assessments will mean you need a second firm for CMMC compliance, duplicating cost and effort. If CMMC applies to you, this should be the first filter in your supplier selection, before scope or price.

NIST CSF 2.0: the US de facto standard for cybersecurity program structure

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (updated to version 2.0 in 2024) is the US federal government's recommended structure for cybersecurity risk management and is the closest US equivalent to the UK's Cyber Essentials as a widely adopted baseline. It is not a certification - it is a framework for organizing your cybersecurity program across six functions: Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. A competent security audit firm should be able to map their findings to NIST CSF 2.0 functions and help you understand where your program has gaps relative to the framework. If a firm is unfamiliar with NIST CSF, they are out of step with the market.

Hidden costs and oversights that catch New York businesses out

These are the items that make two cybersecurity audit quotes look comparable on paper but leave your real attack surface untested or your compliance posture exposed.

Firms without NYDFS experience quoting for regulated financial entities

The NYDFS Cybersecurity Regulation has specific requirements - not just for what is tested, but for how findings are documented, retained, and presented in DFS examination. A security firm that has not worked with 23 NYCRR 500 clients may produce a technically competent penetration test that nonetheless fails to satisfy DFS requirements because the report does not cover the required scope, lacks adequate documentation of methodology, or does not address the regulation's specific risk assessment requirements. Ask for references from NYDFS-regulated clients and evidence that their report format has been reviewed in examination - not just that they are "familiar with the regulation."

Penetration tests scoped without cloud and SaaS environments

New York financial and professional services firms typically run significant operations in AWS, Azure, Salesforce, and Microsoft 365 - and those environments are routinely excluded from standard penetration test scopes that were designed for on-premise infrastructure. A test that misses cloud assets produces a false picture of your attack surface and may not satisfy NYDFS requirements, which expect testing to cover the systems processing covered information. Check every proposal explicitly states which cloud environments are included and how they are tested. AWS and Azure have specific rules about penetration testing their infrastructure that require advance notification - a firm that does not mention this has not thought carefully about cloud testing.

No retest included: paying full rates to verify your own remediation

A penetration test with no pre-agreed retest policy means your team fixes the vulnerabilities, but you only know the fix worked if you pay for another engagement at full rate. For a five-day pentest at $15,000-$30,000, a retest for critical findings can add another $6,000-$12,000 if not pre-agreed. For NYDFS-regulated entities presenting audit results to regulators or enterprise clients, a documented retest confirming findings are remediated is often necessary to close the assurance cycle. Negotiate retest terms - scope, timing, and price - before signing the initial engagement letter.

Questions that separate good security firms from great ones

Asking is only half the job. Below each question is what a good answer sounds like, and what should give you pause. Questions marked * are mainly relevant for larger or more complex engagements - for a straightforward vulnerability assessment or SOC 2 readiness review you can skip those.

"Do you have experience with NYDFS 23 NYCRR 500 penetration testing requirements, and can you reference a client whose DFS examination included your work?"
Why ask it: NYDFS compliance is a specific regulatory requirement, not a generic security audit. Firms that claim familiarity without exam-tested experience may produce reports that do not satisfy DFS requirements. A reference from a regulated client whose DFS examination accepted the firm's work is the most direct evidence of genuine competence.

Good answer: They reference specific experience with NYDFS-regulated entities, explain how their reports are structured to address 23 NYCRR 500 requirements, and offer at least one reference from a client who has been through DFS examination. They understand that the regulation requires both annual penetration testing and quarterly vulnerability assessments.

Red flag: "We are familiar with NYDFS requirements" without a specific client reference or explanation of how their report format addresses the regulation's documentation requirements. Familiarity is not the same as exam-tested delivery.
"Which certifications do your individual testers hold - specifically OSCP, GPEN, or GWAPT - and can you name the tester who will lead our engagement?"
Why ask it: In the absence of a mandatory accreditation scheme like the UK's CREST, individual certifications are the primary signal of technical competence for penetration testers. OSCP is the most rigorous practical credential; GPEN and GWAPT are the most widely recognized GIAC certifications for network and web application testing respectively. Asking for the named tester prevents firms from citing firm-level credentials while deploying junior staff.

Good answer: They name a specific tester, confirm their certifications, and can explain which credentials apply to your scope type - for example, GWAPT is most relevant for web application testing, GPEN for network penetration. They are comfortable providing documentation of individual certifications.

Red flag: "Our team holds various certifications" without naming the individual. That is a firm-level statement that tells you nothing about who will actually conduct your test.
"Does your scope include our cloud environments - specifically AWS, Azure, or Microsoft 365 - and how do you handle AWS and Azure penetration testing notification requirements?"
Why ask it: Cloud environments are where most attacks on New York businesses succeed, and they are routinely excluded from standard scopes. Additionally, AWS and Azure both require advance notification before penetration testing their infrastructure - a firm that does not mention this process has not done cloud testing at scale.

Good answer: A specific answer confirming which cloud platforms are in scope, how they are tested (agent-based, API-level, or assumed-breach scenarios), and a clear description of their process for AWS and Azure penetration testing notifications. They should be able to explain any cloud-specific constraints on what can be tested.

Red flag: A vague answer that says "we cover your infrastructure" without specifying cloud. Or no mention of AWS/Azure notification requirements - that indicates limited cloud testing experience.
"Can you walk us through a sample report from a comparable engagement - specifically how you structure severity ratings and the executive summary?"
Why ask it: The report is the deliverable. For NYDFS-regulated firms, it needs to satisfy DFS examination. For firms presenting to enterprise clients, the executive summary needs to be credible to a non-technical reader. Reviewing a redacted sample before committing is the most direct way to assess whether the firm's output matches your actual needs.

Good answer: They provide a redacted sample promptly, relevant to your sector. The sample shows CVSS-referenced severity ratings with clear justification, proof-of-concept evidence, and an executive summary a CFO or GC could read and act on. For financial services work, the report should reference the regulatory framework being addressed.

Red flag: "We cannot share client reports due to confidentiality." A properly redacted sample removes all client-identifying information - this is not a valid reason to refuse. Refusal usually signals discomfort with report quality.
"Is a retest for critical and high findings included in your quote, and if not, what is your pre-agreed rate for a retest?"
Why ask it: Without pre-agreed retest terms, you are negotiating at the moment of maximum asymmetry - they have seen every vulnerability, you are under pressure to close out findings, and they can price accordingly. For NYDFS-regulated entities, a documented retest is often needed to demonstrate remediation to regulators.

Good answer: A retest policy specified upfront: for example, one retest of all critical and high findings within 90 days, included in the base price, or a fixed day rate for retest work agreed before the initial engagement. The key is that terms are pre-agreed rather than determined after findings are known.

Red flag: "We can discuss retest pricing after you receive the report." That is the moment of maximum leverage for the firm. Any unwillingness to pre-agree retest terms is a commercial signal, not a procedural one.
"How do you calibrate severity ratings, and can you explain what would and would not qualify as Critical in a finding?"*
Why ask it: Inflated severity ratings are a common tactic to make findings look alarming and drive remediation engagements. Understanding calibration methodology before the test lets you assess whether the ratings in the report are trustworthy or commercially motivated. Firms using CVSS scoring should be able to give specific examples of what a CVSS 9.0+ finding looks like versus a 7.0.

Good answer: A clear explanation referencing CVSS scoring or OWASP risk rating methodology, with specific examples. The firm should be comfortable saying that not every engagement produces critical findings, and that a clean or low-severity result is a valid and accurate outcome.

Red flag: Vague answers like "we rate based on business impact" without a defined methodology, or any suggestion that the firm consistently finds critical vulnerabilities in every engagement regardless of scope.

Where you have more negotiating room than you think

Security firms have more flexibility on price and terms than they lead with. These are the levers that actually work once you have competing quotes in front of you.

15-25% savings vs separate engagements

Bundle annual penetration test with quarterly vulnerability scanning

NYDFS 23 NYCRR 500 requires both annual penetration testing and quarterly vulnerability assessments. Commissioning both from the same security firm under an annual retainer agreement removes the firm's cost of acquiring two separate pieces of work and typically produces 15-25% savings on the combined annual price versus separate one-off engagements. The firm also benefits from scheduling efficiency - they know your environment and can deploy resources predictably. A retainer worth $30,000-$60,000 annually gives you meaningful negotiating leverage on individual component pricing.

Prevents post-findings leverage asymmetry

Pre-agree retest scope and price before the initial test

Once the findings report is delivered, any firm offering retest services is negotiating from a position of strength - you need to fix the problems and close out the assurance cycle before a DFS examination or client deadline. Pre-agreeing a retest scope - for example, all critical and high findings within 90 days at a fixed day rate - removes this asymmetry entirely. For NYDFS-regulated entities operating on a compliance calendar, pre-agreed retest terms also mean you can commit to a documentation timeline with your CISO before the test starts.

10-20% savings

Competitive quotes from three qualified firms on an identical scope

New York has a large pool of security firms, but pricing for identical scopes varies significantly - penetration tester day rates range from $1,500 to $3,000 depending on firm size, specialism, and positioning. Running a structured RFQ with two or three firms on the same defined scope creates real competitive tension. Firms that know they are competing will sharpen their proposals in ways they will not if they believe they are the only firm in the conversation. Using RFXapp to distribute an identical brief to multiple firms removes the information asymmetry that drives overpricing.

Better risk management

Phase the test: external and cloud first, internal network second

Structuring the engagement in two phases - Phase 1 covering external infrastructure and cloud environments, Phase 2 covering internal network - lets you commit only to Phase 1 initially. You test the firm's quality of delivery and report clarity before granting internal network access. Phase 1 findings also inform a more targeted Phase 2 scope, which often produces a more focused and cheaper internal test. Ask each firm to quote Phase 1 and Phase 2 separately so you can compare the full-scope price against the phased approach.

10-15% savings

Offer multi-year contract terms in exchange for a pricing commitment

Security firms value predictable revenue, and a two or three-year retainer for annual penetration testing and quarterly vulnerability scanning is worth a pricing concession. A multi-year contract reduces their sales cost, stabilizes their utilization planning, and locks in a client relationship. In exchange, request a fixed day rate for the contract term with no price escalation, or a guaranteed retest inclusion. For NYDFS-regulated entities with an ongoing compliance calendar, the commercial logic of a multi-year retainer aligns with the regulatory obligation.

Better availability and sometimes better pricing

Timing: security firms have quieter periods that work in your favor

Penetration testing firms have identifiable quiet periods - typically late summer (July to September) and the period between Thanksgiving and the New Year - when tester availability is high and pipeline is lower. Testing at these times often produces better scheduling (you get senior testers rather than whoever is available) and sometimes a pricing concession. For New York businesses without a hard NYDFS compliance deadline, building in a two to three week scheduling window around these periods is a low-effort way to improve both price and quality of delivery.

From "I need a cybersecurity audit" to signed off and compliant

1

Describe what you need

Write your requirements in your own words - scope, location, timeline, any constraints. RFXapp turns it into a structured brief and prompts you for anything that will help security firms quote accurately.

2

Invite your security firms

Add the security firms you've already shortlisted, or let RFXapp find local options. They reply by normal email - no portal, no registration.

3

Compare quotes side by side

RFXapp reads every response and standardises the quotes into a side-by-side view - inclusions, exclusions, assumptions and all.

4

Negotiate and appoint

RFXapp drafts targeted negotiation emails based on the gaps between quotes. You review and send. Then award the contract from your dashboard.

Ready to compare cybersecurity audit quotes in New York?

Create your first project in under two minutes. Free plan, no credit card.

Get Started for Free