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

Comparison Overview

BlackbaudBlackbaud
VS
Wolters KluwerWolters Kluwer
Blackbaud

Blackbaud

65 Fairchild St, Charleston, South Carolina, US, 29492

Last Update: 23/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.blackbaud.com
653/1000Weak

Blackbaud (NASDAQ: BLKB) is the leading software provider exclusively dedicated to powering social impact. Serving the nonprofit and education sectors, companies committed to social responsibility, and individual change makers, Blackbaud’s essential software is built to...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:3,125
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2
Wolters Kluwer

Wolters Kluwer

Zuidpoolsingel 2, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2400 BA, NL

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.wolterskluwer.com
751/1000Fair

Wolters Kluwer (EURONEXT: WKL) is a global leader in information, software solutions, and services for professionals in healthcare; tax and accounting; financial and corporate compliance; legal and regulatory; corporate performance and ESG. We help our customers make cr...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:22,994
Subsidiaries:44
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Blackbaud

Blackbaud

-
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
Wolters Kluwer

Wolters Kluwer

-
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 Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Blackbaud has 6.54% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Wolters Kluwer in 2026.

Incidents

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

Blackbaud cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Wolters Kluwer (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Wolters Kluwer cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Blackbaud

Blackbaud

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
BLABARZOL1776911191
🔒 Incident : Breach
BLA256082125
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
BLA551072625
Wolters Kluwer

Wolters Kluwer

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
WOL443041425

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2