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

Comparison Overview

Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)
VS
Capgemini EngineeringCapgemini Engineering
Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)

Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)

6001 E Front St, Kansas City, 64120, US

Last Update: 20/01/2026

View Profile

There is no outsourcing in our engineering team. Instead you will find an in-house department that consists of Professional Engineers, Designers, CAD Technicians and Field Technicians that possess a strong working knowledge of both the National Electric Safety Code and ...

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Capgemini Engineering

Capgemini Engineering

76, Avenue Kléber, Paris, Île-de-France, FR, 75116

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile

World leader in engineering and R&D services, Capgemini Engineering combines its broad industry knowledge and cutting-edge technologies in digital and software to support the convergence of the physical and digital worlds. Coupled with the capabilities of the rest of th...

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:45,121
Subsidiaries:26
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)

Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)

-
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
Capgemini Engineering

Capgemini Engineering

-
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 Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Capgemini Engineering in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Capgemini Engineering (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Capgemini Engineering 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...
Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)

Black & McDonald Engineering Services (US)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Capgemini Engineering

Capgemini Engineering

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-63175
SUMMARY

PlaywrightCapture stored capture-specific configuration and runtime data as mutable class-level variables rather than instance-level variables. Consequently, multiple Capture objects running within the same Python process could share state, including HTTP headers, cookies, browser storage, HTTP credentials, proxy configuration, user-agent settings, geolocation information, and captured request data. In a multi-user or concurrent deployment, information supplied during one capture could therefore persist and be reused by a subsequent or parallel capture. This could result in the disclosure of authentication cookies, credentials, browser storage, or captured request data belonging to another user. It could also cause requests to be performed with another capture's authentication context, headers, or proxy configuration, potentially enabling unauthorized access to remote resources or interference with other capture operations. The vulnerability is resolved by initializing all capture-specific settings and request data as instance variables in the Capture constructor, ensuring that state is isolated between capture operations.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-15
UPDATED
Date2026-07-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-62314
SUMMARY

Anubis is a Web AI Firewall Utility that challenges users' connections in order to protect upstream resources from scraper bots. From 1.22.0 until 1.26.0-pre1, lib/policy/checker.go PathChecker.Check() trusted the client-controlled X-Original-URI header before matching r.URL.Path, allowing an HTTP client to match default data/common/keep-internet-working.yaml ALLOW rules such as ^/\.well-known/.*$ and bypass the Anubis challenge. This issue is fixed in version 1.26.0-pre1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-15
UPDATED
Date2026-07-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-55652
SUMMARY

Wekan is open source kanban built with Meteor. Prior to 9.46, header-login with HEADER_LOGIN_TRUSTED_IPS uses getRequestIp() in server/lib/headerLoginAuth.js to trust the client-supplied X-Forwarded-For header before the real socket address, allowing an unauthenticated attacker to send HEADER_LOGIN_ID for any username and receive a meteor_login_token session, including for admin. This issue is fixed in version 9.46.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-15
UPDATED
Date2026-07-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-55576
SUMMARY

MaaAssistantArknights is a one-click tool for daily Arknights tasks. In the current dev-v2 workflow, .github/workflows/release-preparation.yml inlined attacker-controlled github.event.pull_request.title into a run: shell command during the pull_request opened, reopened, and ready_for_review events, so a non-draft fork PR whose title starts with Release v could execute shell commands on the ubuntu-latest runner during the generate-changelog job. This vulnerability is fixed by commit cafc3946059e6337d2089d4fec8b6885ba17c332.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-15
UPDATED
Date2026-07-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-55445
SUMMARY

Qinglong is a timed task management platform supporting Python3, JavaScript, Shell, and Typescript. Prior to 2.20.1, the init guard middleware in back/loaders/express.ts checks /api/user/init but not /open/user/init, while rewrite('/open/*', '/api/$1') rewrites the whitelisted /open/* path after JWT authentication and the guard have passed; an unauthenticated attacker can send PUT /open/user/init to reset administrator credentials on an initialized instance. This issue is fixed in 2.20.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-15
UPDATED
Date2026-07-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA