Comparison Overview

Arizona Lottery

VS

APOLLO GAMES®

Arizona Lottery

4740 E University Dr, Phoenix, AZ, 85034, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27

The Arizona Lottery operates entirely from the revenue it generates through the sale of its products; it doesn’t receive any general fund dollars from the State. Proceeds from sales of Lottery tickets, nearly $3.4 million per week, fund a variety of vital state programs. Since July 1981, the Arizona Lottery has paid out more than $5 billion in prizes to players, more than $3 billion in net funding to the state, and more than $686 million in commissions to retailers. Learn more at ArizonaLottery.com.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 84
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

APOLLO GAMES®

V Parku 2294/2, Prague, CZ, 14100
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Through the APOLLO GAMES® brand, we have had a successful presence in lottery system design, development and manufacture since 2007. The company’s key strategy is to provide flexible products that meet the requirements of our business partners and their clients. Therefore, we provide comprehensive in-house research and development that – in turn – allows us maximum flexibility in responding to market needs. In an ongoing effort to establish a strong brand that is truly cohesive with its product offering, the company name changed from APK Soft to Apollo Soft in June 2014. The re-branding initiative also provided a unique opportunity to change the legal structure of the business to a limited partnership company. Apollo Soft employs and works with carefully selected professionals with previous careers and experience ranging from financial IS development and cryptographic library auditing to telecommunication system development and GUI design. Currently our customers successfully operate APOLLO GAMES® systems across Europe and Africa. Apollo Soft Ltd is a company incorporated in Malta holding Company Registration Number C-75766, with its registered address at The Victoria Centre, Unit 2, Lower Ground Floor, Valletta Road, Mosta, Malta. Apollo Soft Ltd is authorised by the Malta Gaming Authority as a B2B Games Provider through MGA License MGA/CRP/523/2018 issued on the 29th March 2019.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 111
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/arizona-lottery.jpeg
Arizona Lottery
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/apollogames.jpeg
APOLLO GAMES®
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Arizona Lottery
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
APOLLO GAMES®
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Arizona Lottery in 2025.

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for APOLLO GAMES® in 2025.

Incident History — Arizona Lottery (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Arizona Lottery cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — APOLLO GAMES® (X = Date, Y = Severity)

APOLLO GAMES® cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/arizona-lottery.jpeg
Arizona Lottery
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/apollogames.jpeg
APOLLO GAMES®
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Arizona Lottery company and APOLLO GAMES® company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, APOLLO GAMES® company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Arizona Lottery company.

In the current year, APOLLO GAMES® company and Arizona Lottery company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither APOLLO GAMES® company nor Arizona Lottery company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither APOLLO GAMES® company nor Arizona Lottery company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither APOLLO GAMES® company nor Arizona Lottery company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Arizona Lottery company nor APOLLO GAMES® company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Arizona Lottery nor APOLLO GAMES® holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Arizona Lottery company nor APOLLO GAMES® company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

APOLLO GAMES® company employs more people globally than Arizona Lottery company, reflecting its scale as a Gambling Facilities and Casinos.

Neither Arizona Lottery nor APOLLO GAMES® holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Arizona Lottery nor APOLLO GAMES® holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Arizona Lottery nor APOLLO GAMES® holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Arizona Lottery nor APOLLO GAMES® holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Arizona Lottery nor APOLLO GAMES® holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Arizona Lottery nor APOLLO GAMES® holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H