Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

CRS: Custom Risk SolutionsCRS: Custom Risk Solutions
VS
ConduentConduent
CRS: Custom Risk Solutions

CRS: Custom Risk Solutions

Santa Ana, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
768/1000Fair

Risk and Loss Prevention Solutions Custom Risk Solutions helps organizations protect their brand by identifying and measuring areas that contribute to risk and loss, including operational process gaps, systemic flaws and lack of training. We have a team of professional...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Conduent

Conduent

100 Campus Dr, Florham Park, 07932, US

Last Update: 11/09/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
https://www.conduent.com
100/1000Critical

Conduent delivers digital business solutions and services spanning the commercial, government and transportation spectrum – creating valuable outcomes for its clients and the millions of people who count on them. We leverage cloud computing, artificial intelligence, mac...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:39,366
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
9
Known data breaches
9
Attack type number
4

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
CRS: Custom Risk Solutions

CRS: Custom Risk Solutions

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Conduent

Conduent

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CRS: Custom Risk Solutions in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Conduent has 791.09% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - CRS: Custom Risk Solutions (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CRS: Custom Risk Solutions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Conduent (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Conduent cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
CRS: Custom Risk Solutions

CRS: Custom Risk Solutions

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Conduent

Conduent

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
CON1789158547
🔒 Incident : Breach
CON1788525092
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ADOCONAFLSON1786027126

FAQ

Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions company and Conduent company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions and Conduent, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions and Conduent, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - CRS: Custom Risk Solutions or Conduent ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - CRS: Custom Risk Solutions or Conduent ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions and Conduent, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between CRS: Custom Risk Solutions and Conduent, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA