Comparison Overview

Booz Allen Hamilton

VS

UpGuard

Booz Allen Hamilton

8283 Greensboro Drive, None, McLean, VA, US, 22102
Last Update: 2025-08-05 (UTC)
Between 700 and 749

Whether at the border, up in space, or on the battlefield, we build the advanced technology that makes America stronger, faster, and safer. It’s who we are and what we do. It’s in our code.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 39,322
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

UpGuard

650 Castro St, Ste 120-387, Mountain View, California, US, 94041
Last Update: 2025-06-10 (UTC)
Between 700 and 749

UpGuard is a comprehensive cyber risk solution that combines third-party security ratings, vendor questionnaires, and threat intelligence capabilities to help businesses manage and improve their security posture.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 291
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/booz-allen-hamilton.jpeg
Booz Allen Hamilton
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/upguard.jpeg
UpGuard
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
Booz Allen Hamilton
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
UpGuard
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Booz Allen Hamilton in 2025.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UpGuard in 2025.

Incident History — Booz Allen Hamilton (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Booz Allen Hamilton cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — UpGuard (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UpGuard cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/booz-allen-hamilton.jpeg
Booz Allen Hamilton
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Insider Wrongdoing
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 3/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Insider Threat
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 3/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/upguard.jpeg
UpGuard
Incidents

Date Detected: 09/2019
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Open Access rsync Server
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 07/2018
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Publicly Accessible Server
Blog: Blog

FAQ

UpGuard company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Booz Allen Hamilton company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Booz Allen Hamilton company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to UpGuard company.

In the current year, UpGuard company and Booz Allen Hamilton company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither UpGuard company nor Booz Allen Hamilton company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Booz Allen Hamilton company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other UpGuard company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither UpGuard company nor Booz Allen Hamilton company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton company nor UpGuard company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton nor UpGuard holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton company nor UpGuard company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Booz Allen Hamilton company employs more people globally than UpGuard company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton nor UpGuard holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton nor UpGuard holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton nor UpGuard holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton nor UpGuard holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton nor UpGuard holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Booz Allen Hamilton nor UpGuard holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper authentication in the API authentication middleware of HCL DevOps Loop allows authentication tokens to be accepted without proper validation of their expiration and cryptographic signature. As a result, an attacker could potentially use expired or tampered tokens to gain unauthorized access to sensitive resources and perform actions with elevated privileges.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Improper handling of the authentication token in the Amazon WorkSpaces client for Linux, versions 2023.0 through 2024.8, may expose the authentication token for DCV-based WorkSpaces to other local users on the same client machine. Under certain circumstances, a local user may be able to extract another local user's authentication token from the shared client machine and access their WorkSpace. To mitigate this issue, users should upgrade to the Amazon WorkSpaces client for Linux version 2025.0 or later.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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

OSSN (Open Source Social Network) 8.6 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in /action/rtcomments/status via the timestamp parameter.

Description

A vulnerability in the XiaozhangBang Voluntary Like System V8.8 allows remote attackers to manipulate the zhekou parameter in the /topfirst.php Pay module, enabling unauthorized discounts. By sending a crafted HTTP POST request with zhekou set to an abnormally low value, an attacker can purchase votes at a reduced cost. Furthermore, by modifying the zid parameter, attackers can influence purchases made by other users, amplifying the impact. This issue stems from insufficient server-side validation of these parameters, potentially leading to economic loss and unfair manipulation of vote counts.

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

PocketVJ CP PocketVJ-CP-v3 pvj version 3.9.1 contains an unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability in the submit_opacity.php component. The application fails to sanitize user input in the opacityValue POST parameter before passing it to a shell command, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges on the underlying system.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H