Comparison Overview

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

VS

Internal Revenue Service

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

Washington, District of Columbia, US, 20528
Last Update: 2025-12-18
Between 0 and 549

NOTICE: This social media account will not be actively managed during the lapse in federal funding. We will not be able to respond or update until after funding is enacted. go.dhs.gov/lapse-2025 We lead the National effort to understand, manage, and reduce risk to our cyber and physical infrastructure. Our multi-faceted mission is home to more than 15 career fields including business administration, cybersecurity, program management, communications, data science. We play a vital role in protecting the homeland. Please visit our official website (cisa.gov) to learn how you can contribute to our mission. Review our full Comment Policy: cisa.gov/comment-policy Review DHS LinkedIn Privacy Policy: dhs.gov/linkedin-privacy-policy-and-notice

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 1,741
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
4
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
5

Internal Revenue Service

1111 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, District of Columbia, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Welcome to the Internal Revenue Service’s official LinkedIn account. Here, you will find the latest and greatest news and updates for taxpayers to help them understand and meet their tax responsibilities. Also, this is a place to learn about a meaningful career with the IRS. Check out the tabs above to learn more about us and view job openings. The U.S. government does not promote or endorse any non-government or commercial content appearing on this page. This service is operated by a third party and not an official government website. The IRS strongly discourages you from providing personally identifiable information. Read our privacy policy at www.irs.gov/privacy

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 47,895
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cisagov.jpeg
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
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/irs.jpeg
Internal Revenue Service
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
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Internal Revenue Service
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has 370.59% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

Internal Revenue Service has 17.65% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Internal Revenue Service (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Internal Revenue Service cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cisagov.jpeg
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: DDoS, Custom DDoS Tool (DDoSia), Hacking
Motivation: Political, Disruption of Critical Services
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Motivation: Espionage
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Motivation: Exploit Government Vulnerabilities, Disrupt Critical Infrastructure, Leverage Political Instability, Capitalize on Reduced Oversight
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/irs.jpeg
Internal Revenue Service
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: stolen personal information, phishing, data breach (unspecified)
Motivation: financial gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 01/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Internal Revenue Service company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Internal Revenue Service company.

In the current year, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company has reported more cyber incidents than Internal Revenue Service company.

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Internal Revenue Service company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Internal Revenue Service company and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Both Internal Revenue Service company and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Internal Revenue Service company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency nor Internal Revenue Service holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Internal Revenue Service company.

Internal Revenue Service company employs more people globally than Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency nor Internal Revenue Service holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency nor Internal Revenue Service holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency nor Internal Revenue Service holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency nor Internal Revenue Service holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency nor Internal Revenue Service holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency nor Internal Revenue Service holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Versions starting with 0.211.0 and prior to 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0 contain a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in their workflow expression evaluation system. Under certain conditions, expressions supplied by authenticated users during workflow configuration may be evaluated in an execution context that is not sufficiently isolated from the underlying runtime. An authenticated attacker could abuse this behavior to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the n8n process. Successful exploitation may lead to full compromise of the affected instance, including unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification of workflows, and execution of system-level operations. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0. Users are strongly advised to upgrade to a patched version, which introduces additional safeguards to restrict expression evaluation. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should consider the following temporary mitigations: Limit workflow creation and editing permissions to fully trusted users only; and/or deploy n8n in a hardened environment with restricted operating system privileges and network access to reduce the impact of potential exploitation. These workarounds do not fully eliminate the risk and should only be used as short-term measures.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

FastAPI Users allows users to quickly add a registration and authentication system to their FastAPI project. Prior to version 15.0.2, the OAuth login state tokens are completely stateless and carry no per-request entropy or any data that could link them to the session that initiated the OAuth flow. `generate_state_token()` is always called with an empty `state_data` dict, so the resulting JWT only contains the fixed audience claim plus an expiration timestamp. On callback, the library merely checks that the JWT verifies under `state_secret` and is unexpired; there is no attempt to match the state value to the browser that initiated the OAuth request, no correlation cookie, and no server-side cache. Any attacker can hit `/authorize`, capture the server-generated state, finish the upstream OAuth flow with their own provider account, and then trick a victim into loading `.../callback?code=<attacker_code>&state=<attacker_state>`. Because the state JWT is valid for any client for \~1 hour, the victim’s browser will complete the flow. This leads to login CSRF. Depending on the app’s logic, the login CSRF can lead to an account takeover of the victim account or to the victim user getting logged in to the attacker's account. Version 15.0.2 contains a patch for the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

FileZilla Client 3.63.1 contains a DLL hijacking vulnerability that allows attackers to execute malicious code by placing a crafted TextShaping.dll in the application directory. Attackers can generate a reverse shell payload using msfvenom and replace the missing DLL to achieve remote code execution when the application launches.

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
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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

LDAP Tool Box Self Service Password 1.5.2 contains a password reset vulnerability that allows attackers to manipulate HTTP Host headers during token generation. Attackers can craft malicious password reset requests that generate tokens sent to a controlled server, enabling potential account takeover by intercepting and using stolen reset tokens.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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

Kimai 1.30.10 contains a SameSite cookie vulnerability that allows attackers to steal user session cookies through malicious exploitation. Attackers can trick victims into executing a crafted PHP script that captures and writes session cookie information to a file, enabling potential session hijacking.

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
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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