Comparison Overview

CNAM

VS

Internal Revenue Service

CNAM

50 avenue du Professeur André Lemierre, Paris, Ile-de-France, 75020, FR
Last Update: 2025-11-22

Rejoindre la Caisse nationale de l’Assurance Maladie (Cnam) c’est mettre ses talents au service d’un acteur majeur de la protection sociale française. C’est aussi évoluer au sein de l’un des systèmes d’information les plus importants d’Europe et développer de nouveaux services, pour garantir à nos publics (assurés, professionnels de santé et employeurs) des prestations de qualité au plus près de leurs attentes. C’est enfin veiller à la préservation de notre système de santé en garantissant à la population un égal accès aux droits et aux soins tout en régulant les pratiques et les dépenses pour un juste soin au juste coût. Pour cela, la Cnam s’appuie sur les compétences de 2 220 collaborateurs exerçant une centaine de métiers différents – dont la moitié dans le domaine informatique – répartis sur l’ensemble du territoire.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 3,154
Subsidiaries: 111
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Internal Revenue Service

1111 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, District of Columbia, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20
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/cnam-caisse-nationale-assurance-maladie.jpeg
CNAM
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
CNAM
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)

No incidents recorded for CNAM in 2025.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

Internal Revenue Service has 53.85% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

CNAM 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/cnam-caisse-nationale-assurance-maladie.jpeg
CNAM
Incidents

Date Detected: 03/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Email Compromise
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 03/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Account Hacking
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 CNAM company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

CNAM and Internal Revenue Service have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Internal Revenue Service company has reported more cyber incidents than CNAM company.

Neither Internal Revenue Service company nor CNAM company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Internal Revenue Service company and CNAM company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Internal Revenue Service company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while CNAM company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither CNAM company nor Internal Revenue Service company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither CNAM nor Internal Revenue Service holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

CNAM company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Internal Revenue Service company.

Internal Revenue Service company employs more people globally than CNAM company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither CNAM nor Internal Revenue Service holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither CNAM nor Internal Revenue Service holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither CNAM nor Internal Revenue Service holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither CNAM nor Internal Revenue Service holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither CNAM nor Internal Revenue Service holds HIPAA certification.

Neither CNAM nor Internal Revenue Service 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