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

Comparison Overview

AKQAAKQA
VS
DarDar
AKQA

AKQA

5th floor, 360 Third St, San Francisco, CA, 94107, US

Last Update: 28/02/2026

View Profile
765/1000Fair

AKQA is a design and innovation company that employs over 5,500 professionals across 30 countries. Named Digital Agency Global Network of the Year in Campaign’s 2023 Global Agency of the Year Awards, and a top 10 Most Loved Workplace in 2023 by Newsweek. AKQA was awarde...

NAICS:5414
NAICS Definition:Specialized Design Services
Employees:2,101
Subsidiaries:94
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Dar

Dar

Beirut, LB

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://dar.com/
790/1000Fair

Dar is one of the world’s leading consultancies, providing design, planning, engineering, sustainability consulting, digital solutions and services, project management, and facilities management for buildings, cities, transportation, civil infrastructure, water, and the...

NAICS:5414
NAICS Definition:Specialized Design Services
Employees:12,502
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AKQA

AKQA

-
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
Dar

Dar

-
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 Design Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AKQA in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Design Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Dar in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - AKQA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AKQA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Dar (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Dar cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
AKQA

AKQA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Dar

Dar

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1