Comparison Overview

CoStar Group

VS

Country Garden Group

CoStar Group

1201 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, Virginia, 22209, US
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 800 and 849

Since 1986, our work has kept the customer at the center of all we do. Clients, brokers, business buyers and sellers, and people looking for their next place to live depend on our information to make informed business decisions and plans for their future. Named to the NASDAQ 100 Index and S&P 500 Index for our leadership in real estate and technology, we are the industry standard because we’ve created, refined, and perfected a language that an entire industry trusts. CoStar Group has been recognized on numerous lists, including Forbes’ 2025 America’s Best Large Employers and Richmond Times-Dispatch's 2024 Top Workplaces.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 8,897
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Country Garden Group

345 Nathan Rd, Yau Tsim Mong, Hong Kong, HK
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

Forbes 500 500 Projects Globally Top 10 Real Estate Company in China Over the past 20 years, Country Garden has been a practitioner in China's urbanization, bringing modernization to landscape and improving the quality of people's lives. Besides Mainland China, Country Garden has also been actively expanding overseas markets since 2012, including Malaysia, Australia, Indonesia, India, Thailand, Myanmar, Laos, Russia, Vietnam, Britain, US and other countries. Pairing your unique skills with our global resources and expertise, Country Garden will give you the career you desire. For more information: http://www.bgy.com.cn/china/index.aspx

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 15,670
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/costar-group.jpeg
CoStar Group
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/country-garden-holding-co--ltd-.jpeg
Country Garden Group
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
CoStar Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Country Garden Group
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Real Estate Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CoStar Group in 2025.

Incidents vs Real Estate Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Country Garden Group in 2025.

Incident History — CoStar Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CoStar Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Country Garden Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Country Garden Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/costar-group.jpeg
CoStar Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/country-garden-holding-co--ltd-.jpeg
Country Garden Group
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

CoStar Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Country Garden Group company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Country Garden Group company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to CoStar Group company.

In the current year, Country Garden Group company and CoStar Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Country Garden Group company nor CoStar Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Country Garden Group company nor CoStar Group company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Country Garden Group company nor CoStar Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither CoStar Group company nor Country Garden Group company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither CoStar Group nor Country Garden Group holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

CoStar Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Country Garden Group company.

Country Garden Group company employs more people globally than CoStar Group company, reflecting its scale as a Real Estate.

Neither CoStar Group nor Country Garden Group holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither CoStar Group nor Country Garden Group holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither CoStar Group nor Country Garden Group holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither CoStar Group nor Country Garden Group holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither CoStar Group nor Country Garden Group holds HIPAA certification.

Neither CoStar Group nor Country Garden Group 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