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

Comparison Overview

CafLabCafLab
VS
State of CaliforniaState of California
CafLab

CafLab

Paris, FR

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://caf.fr
761/1000Fair

Le CafLab de la branche famille, c’est : - Un centre de ressources au service des directions métiers pour organiser des sessions de créativité, accompagner ou co-porter des projets, résoudre des problèmes et/ou concevoir des solutions innovantes - Un lab façon incubat...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
State of California

State of California

Sacramento, Sacramento, 95814, US

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.ca.gov
792/1000Fair

Californians deserve a government that works for them and with them. One that will work to ensure opportunity and justice. We are building a California not for the few, but for all — including those who have historically been left out. We are doing the work to make ou...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:44,863
Subsidiaries:29
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
CafLab

CafLab

-
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
State of California

State of California

-
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 Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CafLab in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for State of California in 2026.

Incidents

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

CafLab cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - State of California (X = Date, Y = Severity)

State of California 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...
CafLab

CafLab

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
State of California

State of California

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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