Comparison Overview

City of Philadelphia

VS

Nav

City of Philadelphia

City Hall, None, Philadelphia, PA, US, 19102
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 650 and 699

With a workforce of 30,000 people, and opportunities in 1,000 different job categories, the City of Philadelphia is one of the largest employers in Southeastern Pennsylvania. As an employer, we operate through the guiding principles of service, integrity, respect, accountability, collaboration, diversity and inclusion. We strive to effectively deliver services, to resolve the challenges facing our city, and to make Philadelphia a place where all of our residents have the opportunity to reach their potential. To learn more about job opportunities, visit www.phila.gov or follow #PHLCityJobs.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 11,387
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Nav

Fyrstikkalléen 1, Oslo, undefined, 0661, NO
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Nav er en viktig del av sikkerhetsnettet i velferdsstaten. Vi skal bidra til at flere kommer i arbeid og færre går på stønad, og samtidig sørge for at de som trenger det er sikra inntekt og økonomisk trygghet gjennom rett pengestøtte til rett tid. For å løse dette samfunnsoppdraget forvalter Nav om lag en tredel av statsbudsjettet, gjennom ordninger som arbeidsrettede tiltak, dagpenger, arbeidsavklaringspenger, sykepenger, pensjon, økonomisk sosialhjelp, foreldrepenger, barnetrygd og kontantstøtte. Nav tilbyr tjenester, ytelser og stønader til både privatpersoner og arbeidsgivere. For å sikre helhetlige tjenester, samarbeider vi tett med arbeidslivet, kommune-, helse- og utdanningssektoren, andre statlige virksomheter og frivillige aktører.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 12,618
Subsidiaries: 4
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-philadelphia.jpeg
City of Philadelphia
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 Philadelphia
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Nav
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for City of Philadelphia in 2025.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Nav in 2025.

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

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

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

Nav 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-philadelphia.jpeg
City of Philadelphia
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Cyberattack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 3/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Phishing
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nav.jpeg
Nav
Incidents

FAQ

Nav company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to City of Philadelphia company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

City of Philadelphia company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Nav company has not reported any.

In the current year, Nav company and City of Philadelphia company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Nav company nor City of Philadelphia company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

City of Philadelphia company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Nav company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Nav company nor City of Philadelphia company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither City of Philadelphia company nor Nav company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither City of Philadelphia nor Nav holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

City of Philadelphia company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Nav company.

Nav company employs more people globally than City of Philadelphia company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither City of Philadelphia nor Nav holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither City of Philadelphia nor Nav holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither City of Philadelphia nor Nav holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither City of Philadelphia nor Nav holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither City of Philadelphia nor Nav holds HIPAA certification.

Neither City of Philadelphia nor Nav holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H