Comparison Overview

434 Marketing

VS

Clinic

434 Marketing

707 Clay St, Lynchburg, Virginia, 24504, US
Last Update: 2025-03-05 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

434 Marketing is a veteran digital marketing agency that specializes in website design, content marketing, and market research. We help businesses of all sizes grow their online presence and achieve their marketing goals with a thorough approach to your websiteโ€™s design, structure and content.

NAICS: 541613
NAICS Definition: Marketing Consulting Services
Employees: 10
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Clinic

20-24 Broadwick St, London, undefined, W1F 8HT, GB
Last Update: 2025-03-04 (UTC)

Excellent

Between 900 and 1000

Clinic is an independent creative agency. We create bold ideas, and craft them beautifully, to get people thinking, believing and doing. All of our experience goes into what we do today, and although our worldโ€™s constantly changing, the endpoint is still people and their experience, no matter what the context or media. Born a Virgin company, the core principles of challenging the norm and putting people front and centre have served us well over the years. And theyโ€™ve served the many brands weโ€™ve worked with even better. What does that mean in the real world? Launching products & services, increasing subscriber numbers, helping multi-faceted businesses feel human and showing brands how to be themselves. Whatever weโ€™re doing, the core is understanding people and solving problems creatively. Itโ€™s what weโ€™ve done for over 30 years, and it still drives us forward. We call it being something else.

NAICS: 541613
NAICS Definition: Marketing Consulting Services
Employees: 15,960
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/434marketing.jpeg
434 Marketing
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/clinic.jpeg
Clinic
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
434 Marketing
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Clinic
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Advertising Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for 434 Marketing in 2025.

Incidents vs Advertising Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Clinic in 2025.

Incident History โ€” 434 Marketing (X = Date, Y = Severity)

434 Marketing cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Clinic (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Clinic cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/434marketing.jpeg
434 Marketing
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/clinic.jpeg
Clinic
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both 434 Marketing company and Clinic company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Clinic company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to 434 Marketing company.

In the current year, Clinic company and 434 Marketing company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Clinic company nor 434 Marketing company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Clinic company nor 434 Marketing company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Clinic company nor 434 Marketing company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither 434 Marketing company nor Clinic company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither 434 Marketing company nor Clinic company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Clinic company employs more people globally than 434 Marketing company, reflecting its scale as a Advertising Services.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Formbricks is an open source qualtrics alternative. Prior to version 4.0.1, Formbricks is missing JWT signature verification. This vulnerability stems from a token validation routine that only decodes JWTs (jwt.decode) without verifying their signatures. Both the email verification token login path and the password reset server action use the same validator, which does not check the tokenโ€™s signature, expiration, issuer, or audience. If an attacker learns the victimโ€™s actual user.id, they can craft an arbitrary JWT with an alg: "none" header and use it to authenticate and reset the victimโ€™s password. This issue has been patched in version 4.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

Apollo Studio Embeddable Explorer & Embeddable Sandbox are website embeddable software solutions from Apollo GraphQL. Prior to Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3, a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability was identified. The vulnerability arises from missing origin validation in the client-side code that handles window.postMessage events. A malicious website can send forged messages to the embedding page, causing the victimโ€™s browser to execute arbitrary GraphQL queries or mutations against their GraphQL server while authenticated with the victimโ€™s cookies. This issue has been patched in Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /consulta-dispensas. Such manipulation leads to improper authorization. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

A weakness has been identified in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected is an unknown function of the file /module/Api/aluno. This manipulation of the argument aluno_id causes improper authorization. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

A security flaw has been discovered in Tencent WeKnora 0.1.0. This impacts the function testEmbeddingModel of the file /api/v1/initialization/embedding/test. The manipulation of the argument baseUrl results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component. The vendor responds: "We have confirmed that the issue mentioned in the report does not exist in the latest releases".

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X