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

Comparison Overview

AlliedBarton Security ServicesAlliedBarton Security Services
VS
Securitas NederlandSecuritas Nederland
AlliedBarton Security Services

AlliedBarton Security Services

undefined, undefined, undefined, undefined, US

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.aus.com
770/1000Fair

We've merged! Join us on our new LinkedIn page, Allied Universal! Allied Universal was formed in August 2016, through the merger of AlliedBarton Security Services and Universal Services of America. This brought together two industry leaders, combining best practices,...

NAICS:5616
NAICS Definition:Investigation and Security Services
Employees:5,959
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Securitas Nederland

Securitas Nederland

De Corridor 3a, Breukelen, Utrecht, NL, 3621

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.securitas.nl
786/1000Fair

Door de juiste inzet van mens, kennis en techniek vinden we de ideale ‘veiligheidsbalans’ voor iedere situatie. Dat begint altijd met heel goed luisteren om zo te doorgronden wat de specifieke omstandigheden en wensen van de klant zijn. Vervolgens groeien we samen naar ...

NAICS:5616
NAICS Definition:Investigation and Security Services
Employees:12,873
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AlliedBarton Security Services

AlliedBarton Security Services

-
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
Securitas Nederland

Securitas Nederland

-
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 Security and Investigations Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AlliedBarton Security Services in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Security and Investigations Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Securitas Nederland in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - AlliedBarton Security Services (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AlliedBarton Security Services cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Securitas Nederland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Securitas Nederland 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...
AlliedBarton Security Services

AlliedBarton Security Services

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Securitas Nederland

Securitas Nederland

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9