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

Comparison Overview

Carlson Building MaintenanceCarlson Building Maintenance
VS
Onet SAOnet SA
Carlson Building Maintenance

Carlson Building Maintenance

1857 Buerkle Rd, White Bear Lake, 55110, US

Last Update: 17/04/2026

View Profile
Between 600 and 649
https://carlsonbuilding.com/
640/1000Poor

We are a privately-owned Minnesota company specializing in cleaning and floor maintenance for large retail and educational clients since 1959. For more than 60 years, Carlson has specialized in cleaning and maintaining floors. That journey started with Don Carlson back ...

NAICS:5612
NAICS Definition:Facilities Support Services
Employees:32
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Onet SA

Onet SA

36 Boulevard de l'océan, Marseille, 13009, FR

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.groupeonet.com
777/1000Fair

Onet is a family service group, born in Marseille around 1860. Our 74,000 employees are spread over more than 500 locations in 8 countries. The global business volume in 2019 is 2 billion euros. Our vision: We know that human beings are never better than several people...

NAICS:5612
NAICS Definition:Facilities Support Services
Employees:14,137
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Carlson Building Maintenance

Carlson Building Maintenance

-
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
Onet SA

Onet SA

-
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 Facilities Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Carlson Building Maintenance in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Facilities Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Onet SA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Carlson Building Maintenance (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Carlson Building Maintenance cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Onet SA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Onet SA 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...
Carlson Building Maintenance

Carlson Building Maintenance

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
CAR1776443696
Onet SA

Onet SA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1