Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

AKG SingaporeAKG Singapore
VS
I WORK FOR SAI WORK FOR SA
AKG Singapore

AKG Singapore

1 Gateway Drive , #11-02 , West Gate Tower, Singapore, SG, 608531

Last Update: 06/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://akgsingapore.sg/
760/1000Fair

We empower people through employment, health and education - enabling them to thrive in their communities.

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
I WORK FOR SA

I WORK FOR SA

200, Victoria Square / Tarndanyangga, Adelaide, 5000, AU

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://iworkfor.sa.gov.au
779/1000Fair

The OFFICIAL careers page for the South Australian Government. The South Australian Public Sector is the State's largest workforce. We are an employer of choice that reflects the diverse community we serve. Our people are from a range of backgrounds and vocations, fro...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:19,039
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AKG Singapore

AKG Singapore

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
I WORK FOR SA

I WORK FOR SA

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AKG Singapore in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for I WORK FOR SA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - AKG Singapore (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AKG Singapore cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - I WORK FOR SA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

I WORK FOR SA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
AKG Singapore

AKG Singapore

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
I WORK FOR SA

I WORK FOR SA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between AKG Singapore company and I WORK FOR SA company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between AKG Singapore and I WORK FOR SA, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between AKG Singapore and I WORK FOR SA, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - AKG Singapore or I WORK FOR SA ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - AKG Singapore or I WORK FOR SA ?
Between AKG Singapore and I WORK FOR SA, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between AKG Singapore and I WORK FOR SA, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/E:X/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8