Comparison Overview

California Highway Patrol

VS

SAPS

California Highway Patrol

601 N 7th St, Sacramento, 95811, US
Last Update: 2025-12-02
Between 650 and 699

THE AVERAGE CAREER JUST WON’T DO. YOU ARE MADE FOR MORE. YOU ARE THE CHP. There is a reason the California Highway Patrol is regarded as one of the top law enforcement agencies in the nation. At the California Highway Patrol we set a very high standard. Our job is critical and we take an oath to stand for something bigger than ourselves – to provide safety, service and security to all the citizens and visitors of our state. It is this same courage and honor of duty we seek from new recruits. We are husbands, mothers, daughters, athletes, military… But there is one thing we all have in common – we make a difference. We strive to be the best. The average career just won’t do. We are made for more – we are CHP. Now you can be too. CHP is embarking on a mission to fill 1,000 officer positions by hiring qualified individuals from California’s diverse communities. Opportunity awaits by becoming one of the CHP 1000. By joining the CHP, you will have a chance to make a dramatic difference every day. In this career, it is never the same day twice. A career with the CHP will give you more than you ever thought possible. More purpose. More opportunity. More satisfaction.

NAICS: 92212
NAICS Definition: Police Protection
Employees: 2,147
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

SAPS

ZA
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Policing in South Africa. I am attached to the newly formed Directorate for Priority Crime Investigations. Formally I was attached to the Detecitve Service and have been conduction investigations for over 25 years. I have also been attached to the National Inspectorate Division of the SAPS for soem 10 years.

NAICS: 92212
NAICS Definition: Police Protection
Employees: 15,336
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/californiahighwaypatrol.jpeg
California Highway Patrol
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
SAPS
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
California Highway Patrol
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
SAPS
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Law Enforcement Industry Average (This Year)

California Highway Patrol has 383.87% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Law Enforcement Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SAPS in 2025.

Incident History — California Highway Patrol (X = Date, Y = Severity)

California Highway Patrol cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

SAPS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/californiahighwaypatrol.jpeg
California Highway Patrol
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 1/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 1/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
SAPS
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

SAPS company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to California Highway Patrol company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

California Highway Patrol company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas SAPS company has not reported any.

In the current year, California Highway Patrol company has reported more cyber incidents than SAPS company.

Neither SAPS company nor California Highway Patrol company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

California Highway Patrol company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other SAPS company has not reported such incidents publicly.

California Highway Patrol company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while SAPS company has not reported such incidents publicly.

California Highway Patrol company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while SAPS company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither California Highway Patrol nor SAPS holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither California Highway Patrol company nor SAPS company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

SAPS company employs more people globally than California Highway Patrol company, reflecting its scale as a Law Enforcement.

Neither California Highway Patrol nor SAPS holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither California Highway Patrol nor SAPS holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither California Highway Patrol nor SAPS holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither California Highway Patrol nor SAPS holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither California Highway Patrol nor SAPS holds HIPAA certification.

Neither California Highway Patrol nor SAPS holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

MCP Server Kubernetes is an MCP Server that can connect to a Kubernetes cluster and manage it. Prior to 2.9.8, there is a security issue exists in the exec_in_pod tool of the mcp-server-kubernetes MCP Server. The tool accepts user-provided commands in both array and string formats. When a string format is provided, it is passed directly to shell interpretation (sh -c) without input validation, allowing shell metacharacters to be interpreted. This vulnerability can be exploited through direct command injection or indirect prompt injection attacks, where AI agents may execute commands without explicit user intent. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.9.8.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.4
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

XML external entity (XXE) injection in eyoucms v1.7.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via crafted body of a POST request.

Description

An issue was discovered in Fanvil x210 V2 2.12.20 allowing unauthenticated attackers on the local network to access administrative functions of the device (e.g. file upload, firmware update, reboot...) via a crafted authentication bypass.

Description

Cal.com is open-source scheduling software. Prior to 5.9.8, A flaw in the login credentials provider allows an attacker to bypass password verification when a TOTP code is provided, potentially gaining unauthorized access to user accounts. This issue exists due to problematic conditional logic in the authentication flow. This vulnerability is fixed in 5.9.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/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

Rhino is an open-source implementation of JavaScript written entirely in Java. Prior to 1.8.1, 1.7.15.1, and 1.7.14.1, when an application passed an attacker controlled float poing number into the toFixed() function, it might lead to high CPU consumption and a potential Denial of Service. Small numbers go through this call stack: NativeNumber.numTo > DToA.JS_dtostr > DToA.JS_dtoa > DToA.pow5mult where pow5mult attempts to raise 5 to a ridiculous power. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.8.1, 1.7.15.1, and 1.7.14.1.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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