Comparison Overview

County of Santa Clara

VS

City of Framingham

County of Santa Clara

70 W. Hedding St., San Jose, CA, US, 95110
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

The County of Santa Clara is located at the southern end of the San Francisco Bay and encompasses 1,312 square miles. It has one of the highest median family incomes in the country, and a wide diversity of cultures, backgrounds and talents. The County of Santa Clara continues to attract people from all over the world. With more than 70 agencies/departments and 22,000 employees, the County of Santa Clara plans for the needs of a dynamic community, provides quality services, and promotes a healthy, safe and prosperous community for all. The County provides essential services including public health protection, environmental protection, medical services through Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (SCVMC), child and adult protection services, homelessness prevention and solutions, roads, park services, libraries, emergency response to disasters, protection of minority communities and those under threat, access to a fair criminal justice system, and scores of other services, particularly for those members of our community in the greatest need. The County's population of nearly 1.9 million is one of the largest in the state, and the largest of the nine Bay Area counties. Its population constitutes about one fourth of the Bay Area's total population. There are 15 cities including Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale ranging from Palo Alto to the north, to Gilroy in the south. San Jose is the largest city in the County, with a population of 1.035 million, and is the administrative site of County Government. A significant portion of the county's land area is unincorporated ranch and farmland. Nearly 92% of the population lives in cities. The County of Santa Clara operates 27 parks covering more than 50,000 acres including scenic lakes, streams, and miles of hiking and biking trails. santaclaracounty.gov/social-media-disclaimer

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 13,186
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

City of Framingham

150 Concord Street Framingham, MA 01702, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

OVERVIEW Framingham was incorporated as a town on June 25, 1700. Chapter 143 of the Acts of 1949 established the Town of Framingham Representative Town Government by Limited Town Meetings. The Citizens of Framingham adopted the Home Rule Charter for the City of Framingham at an election held on April 5, 2017. The benefits of local government outlined in the Home Rule Charter affirm the values of representative democracy, strong leadership, and citizen participation. On November 7, 2017 the citizens of Framingham elected the first Mayor, City Council and School Committee, who were sworn into office on January 1, 2018. EXECUTIVE & LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES The executive and administrative powers of the municipality are solely vested in the Mayor, and may be exercised by the Mayor either personally or through several municipal agencies under the general supervision and control of the Mayor. The Mayor shall enforce the charter, the laws, the ordinances and other orders of the municipality and record all official acts of the executive branch of City government. The Mayor shall exercise general supervision and direction over all municipal agencies, unless otherwise provided by law, by the charter or by ordinance. City Council is the sole legislative body of the City, and is therefore responsible for passing all City ordinances. The City Council is made up of eleven (11) members which shall exercise the legislative powers of Framingham. Two (2) of these members are known as councilors-at-large and nine (9) members are known as district councilors.

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/county-of-santa-clara.jpeg
County of Santa Clara
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/city-of-framingham.jpeg
City of Framingham
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
County of Santa Clara
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
City of Framingham
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for County of Santa Clara in 2025.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for City of Framingham in 2025.

Incident History — County of Santa Clara (X = Date, Y = Severity)

County of Santa Clara cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

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

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/county-of-santa-clara.jpeg
County of Santa Clara
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2013
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Theft of Laptop
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/city-of-framingham.jpeg
City of Framingham
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

County of Santa Clara company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to City of Framingham company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

County of Santa Clara company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas City of Framingham company has not reported any.

In the current year, City of Framingham company and County of Santa Clara company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither City of Framingham company nor County of Santa Clara company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

County of Santa Clara company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other City of Framingham company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither City of Framingham company nor County of Santa Clara company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither County of Santa Clara company nor City of Framingham company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither County of Santa Clara nor City of Framingham holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither County of Santa Clara company nor City of Framingham company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

County of Santa Clara company employs more people globally than City of Framingham company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither County of Santa Clara nor City of Framingham holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither County of Santa Clara nor City of Framingham holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither County of Santa Clara nor City of Framingham holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither County of Santa Clara nor City of Framingham holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither County of Santa Clara nor City of Framingham holds HIPAA certification.

Neither County of Santa Clara nor City of Framingham holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper Authorization (CWE-285) in Kibana can lead to privilege escalation (CAPEC-233) by allowing an authenticated user to bypass intended permission restrictions via a crafted HTTP request. This allows an attacker who lacks the live queries - read permission to successfully retrieve the list of live queries.

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
Description

Weblate is a web based localization tool. In versions prior to 5.15.1, it was possible to overwrite Git configuration remotely and override some of its behavior. Version 5.15.1 fixes the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (CWE-770) in Elasticsearch can allow an authenticated user with snapshot restore privileges to cause Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130) of memory and a denial of service (DoS) via crafted HTTP request.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (CWE-770) in Kibana can allow a low-privileged authenticated user to cause Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130) of computing resources and a denial of service (DoS) of the Kibana process via a crafted HTTP request.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (CWE-79) allows an unauthenticated user to embed a malicious script in content that will be served to web browsers causing cross-site scripting (XSS) (CAPEC-63) via a vulnerability a function handler in the Vega AST evaluator.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N