Comparison Overview

Concord

VS

Iron Mountain

Concord

509 2nd Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN, 55343, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 700 and 749

Concord is a technology consultancy building connected customer experiences backed by powerful AI & analytics and underpinned by secure IT foundations. Digital Experience | Data & Analytics | Engineering & Applications

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 563
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Iron Mountain

1 Federal Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02110, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

For over 70 years, Iron Mountain Incorporated (NYSE: IRM) has been your strategic partner to care for your information and assets. A global leader in storage and information management services and trusted by more than 225,000 organizations around the world, including 95% of the Fortune 1000, we protect, unlock, and extend the value of your work—whatever it is, wherever it is, however it’s stored. We create the framework necessary to bridge the gaps between paper, digital, media, and physical data and extract value along its lifecycle, helping to build your organizational resilience. And all this with a commitment to sustainability at our core. Our relationship is a true partnership where you trust us not only to preserve institutional knowledge and enhance efficiency, security, and access but to make your work mean more. Because in that work is the power to not only accelerate your business, but elevate it. Elevate the power of your work.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 19,962
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/concord.jpeg
Concord
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/iron-mountain.jpeg
Iron Mountain
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
Concord
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Iron Mountain
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Concord in 2025.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Iron Mountain in 2025.

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

Concord cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Iron Mountain (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Iron Mountain cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/concord.jpeg
Concord
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2019
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Physical Theft
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/iron-mountain.jpeg
Iron Mountain
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Iron Mountain company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Concord company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Concord company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Iron Mountain company has not reported any.

In the current year, Iron Mountain company and Concord company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Iron Mountain company nor Concord company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Concord company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Iron Mountain company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Iron Mountain company nor Concord company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Concord company nor Iron Mountain company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Concord nor Iron Mountain holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Iron Mountain company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Concord company.

Iron Mountain company employs more people globally than Concord company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither Concord nor Iron Mountain holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Concord nor Iron Mountain holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Concord nor Iron Mountain holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Concord nor Iron Mountain holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Concord nor Iron Mountain holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Concord nor Iron Mountain holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

httparty is an API tool. In versions 0.23.2 and prior, httparty is vulnerable to SSRF. This issue can pose a risk of leaking API keys, and it can also allow third parties to issue requests to internal servers. This issue has been patched via commit 0529bcd.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

5ire is a cross-platform desktop artificial intelligence assistant and model context protocol client. In versions 0.15.2 and prior, an RCE vulnerability exists in useMarkdown.ts, where the markdown-it-mermaid plugin is initialized with securityLevel: 'loose'. This configuration explicitly permits the rendering of HTML tags within Mermaid diagram nodes. This issue has not been patched at time of publication.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

continuwuity is a Matrix homeserver written in Rust. Prior to version 0.5.0, this vulnerability allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to force the target server to cryptographically sign arbitrary membership events. The flaw exists because the server fails to validate the origin of a signing request, provided the event's state_key is a valid user ID belonging to the target server. This issue has been patched in version 0.5.0. A workaround for this issue involves blocking access to the PUT /_matrix/federation/v2/invite/{roomId}/{eventId} endpoint using the reverse proxy.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:L/SA:L/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

LangChain is a framework for building LLM-powered applications. Prior to @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and prior to langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain JS's toJSON() method (and subsequently when string-ifying objects using JSON.stringify(). The method did not escape objects with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form data in kwargs. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

LangChain is a framework for building agents and LLM-powered applications. Prior to versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain's dumps() and dumpd() functions. The functions do not escape dictionaries with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form dictionaries. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N