Comparison Overview

City of Brantford

VS

General Directorate of Forestry

City of Brantford

Last Update: 2025-11-28
View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.Brantford.ca

The City of Brantford is made up of a community of dedicated staff who work together to deliver hundreds of programs and services each day with the ultimate goal of enhancing the quality of life for our residents. Guided by the policies and priorities of Council, the City's Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) leads and brings together the efforts of all Commissions and departments, ensuring that the City's programs and services meet the demands and expectations of the community. Our determination to attract and retain the best and brightest talent is reflected in our investment in the people who work here. Our employees take pride in helping to build a better city for all while doing work that matters.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 788
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
View Profile

General Directorate of Forestry

Ankara, 06530, TR
Last Update: 2025-11-29
Between 750 and 799
http://www.ogm.gov.tr

GENERAL DIRECTORATE of FORESTRY (GDF) ORMAN GENEL MÜDÜRLÜĞÜ (OGM) The first organization of forestry extends back to 1839, during rule of Ottoman Empire. The establishment of the first management planning team in 1916 and the preparation of the first management plan 1917 fall in this period. The first Forest Law was also released in the same year. The development of the forest legislation gained momentum after the establishment of the Republic of Turkey. The first forest decree of the Republic of Turkey enacted in 1924. The Forest Law No. 3116 enacted in 1937 made first legal definition of forest and introduced the first set of forest policies. The Forest Act had been subject to many amendments until the preparation of the new Forest Law (No 6831) in 1956. This Law has been under implementation since then, but again, with many amendments. After the experience with private national and foreign contractors of forests for management, all forests were nationalized in 1945. This year marks as one of the important benchmarks of forestry history. That year is also remembered with the broke of extensive forest fires far ahead the averages. In 1950 the nationalized forests were restituted to their former owners. The maquis also were excluded from forest regime. For long years, all forestry activities were carried out by single organization, The General Directorate of Forestry (GDF). GDF has been a “a public legal entity” as a connected unit (see part 4.4) to various ministries but generally to the Ministry of Agriculture. Then the Ministry of Forestry was founded in 1970. Some of the functions of GDF, such as aforestation, nurseries, national parks, protected areas, wild-life and game, were taken to the responsibility of the Ministry of Forestry. The Ministry was re-founded again in 1991. Finally in 2003, it has been merged with the Ministry of Environment. GDF has been kept intact and connected, this time, to the MEF.

NAICS: 922
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 10,001
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/city-of-brantford.jpeg
City of Brantford
—
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/general-directorate-of-forestry.jpeg
General Directorate of Forestry
—
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
City of Brantford
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
General Directorate of Forestry
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for City of Brantford in 2025.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for General Directorate of Forestry in 2025.

Incident History — City of Brantford (X = Date, Y = Severity)

City of Brantford cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — General Directorate of Forestry (X = Date, Y = Severity)

General Directorate of Forestry cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/city-of-brantford.jpeg
City of Brantford
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Incorrect access permissions and configuration settings
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/general-directorate-of-forestry.jpeg
General Directorate of Forestry
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

General Directorate of Forestry company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to City of Brantford company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

City of Brantford company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas General Directorate of Forestry company has not reported any.

In the current year, General Directorate of Forestry company and City of Brantford company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither General Directorate of Forestry company nor City of Brantford company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

City of Brantford company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other General Directorate of Forestry company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither General Directorate of Forestry company nor City of Brantford company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither City of Brantford company nor General Directorate of Forestry company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither City of Brantford nor General Directorate of Forestry holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither City of Brantford company nor General Directorate of Forestry company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

General Directorate of Forestry company employs more people globally than City of Brantford company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither City of Brantford nor General Directorate of Forestry holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither City of Brantford nor General Directorate of Forestry holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither City of Brantford nor General Directorate of Forestry holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither City of Brantford nor General Directorate of Forestry holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither City of Brantford nor General Directorate of Forestry holds HIPAA certification.

Neither City of Brantford nor General Directorate of Forestry holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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
References
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
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
References
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
References
Description

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
References
Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
References