Comparison Overview

Bannock County

VS

State of Oregon

Bannock County

624 E Center St, Pocatello, 83201, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 700 and 749

Bannock County, State of Idaho.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 233
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

State of Oregon

Salem, 97301, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Official LinkedIn page for the state of Oregon. Oregon is a state in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. It is located on the Pacific coast, with Washington to the north, California to the south, Nevada on the southeast and Idaho to the east. The Columbia and Snake rivers delineate much of Oregon's northern and eastern boundaries, respectively. The area was inhabited by many indigenous tribes before the arrival of traders, explorers, and settlers who formed an autonomous government in Oregon Country in 1843. The Oregon Territory was created in 1848, and Oregon became the 33rd state on February 14, 1859.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 10,454
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bannock-county-shop.jpeg
Bannock County
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/state-of-oregon.jpeg
State of Oregon
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
Bannock County
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
State of Oregon
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bannock County in 2025.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for State of Oregon in 2025.

Incident History — Bannock County (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bannock County cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — State of Oregon (X = Date, Y = Severity)

State of Oregon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bannock-county-shop.jpeg
Bannock County
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2020
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/state-of-oregon.jpeg
State of Oregon
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Data exfiltration and ransom
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 06/2023
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

State of Oregon company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Bannock County company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

State of Oregon company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Bannock County company.

In the current year, State of Oregon company and Bannock County company have not reported any cyber incidents.

State of Oregon company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Bannock County company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both State of Oregon company and Bannock County company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither State of Oregon company nor Bannock County company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Bannock County company nor State of Oregon company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Bannock County nor State of Oregon holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

State of Oregon company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Bannock County company.

State of Oregon company employs more people globally than Bannock County company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither Bannock County nor State of Oregon holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Bannock County nor State of Oregon holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Bannock County nor State of Oregon holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Bannock County nor State of Oregon holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Bannock County nor State of Oregon holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Bannock County nor State of Oregon holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34, there is a vulnerability in ImageMagick’s Magick++ layer that manifests when Options::fontFamily is invoked with an empty string. Clearing a font family calls RelinquishMagickMemory on _drawInfo->font, freeing the font string but leaving _drawInfo->font pointing to freed memory while _drawInfo->family is set to that (now-invalid) pointer. Any later cleanup or reuse of _drawInfo->font re-frees or dereferences dangling memory. DestroyDrawInfo and other setters (Options::font, Image::font) assume _drawInfo->font remains valid, so destruction or subsequent updates trigger crashes or heap corruption. This vulnerability is fixed in 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
Description

FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 has a Remote Code Execution via Unrestricted File Upload in Ad Management. FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 allows authenticated remote attackers to upload files that the server later executes (or stores in an executable location) without sufficient validation, sanitization, or execution restrictions. An authenticated remote attacker can upload a crafted PHP file and cause the application or web server to execute it, resulting in remote code execution (RCE).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

PHPGurukul Billing System 1.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the admin/index.php endpoint. Specifically, the username parameter accepts unvalidated user input, which is then concatenated directly into a backend SQL query.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

NMIS/BioDose software V22.02 and previous versions contain executable binaries with plain text hard-coded passwords. These hard-coded passwords could allow unauthorized access to both the application and database.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
cvss4
Base: 8.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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

NMIS/BioDose V22.02 and previous versions' installation directory paths by default have insecure file permissions, which in certain deployment scenarios can enable users on client workstations to modify the program executables and libraries.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/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