Comparison Overview

Encore Capital Management

VS

International Workplace Group plc

Encore Capital Management

One Town Center, Boca Raton, FL, 33486, US
Last Update: 2025-03-10 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799

Encore Capital Management is a diversified, multiple fund, real estate investment and development firm. For information about Encore, contact [email protected] or 415.561.0600

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 38
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

International Workplace Group plc

Dammstrasse 19, Zug, Switzerland, CH-6300, CH
Last Update: 2025-03-05 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799

IWG is leading the workspace revolution. Our companies help more than 2.5 million people and their businesses to work more productively. We do so by providing a choice of professional, inspiring and collaborative workspaces, communities and services. Our customers are start-ups, small and medium-sized enterprises and large multinationals, with unique goals and aspirations. They want a choice of workspaces and communities to match their needs. Through our companies we provide that choice. Regus | Spaces | No18 | Openoffice | Basepoint | Signature IWG companies now help millions of people in almost 3,300 locations in over 1,000 towns and cities across more than 110 countries. We create personal, financial and strategic value for businesses of every size. From some of the most exciting companies and well-known organisations on the planet, to individuals and the next generation of industry leaders. #greatdayatwork

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 13,287
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/encore_capital_management.jpeg
Encore Capital Management
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/iwg-plc.jpeg
International Workplace Group plc
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
Encore Capital Management
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
International Workplace Group plc
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Real Estate Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Encore Capital Management in 2025.

Incidents vs Real Estate Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for International Workplace Group plc in 2025.

Incident History — Encore Capital Management (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Encore Capital Management cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — International Workplace Group plc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

International Workplace Group plc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/encore_capital_management.jpeg
Encore Capital Management
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/iwg-plc.jpeg
International Workplace Group plc
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

International Workplace Group plc company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Encore Capital Management company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, International Workplace Group plc company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Encore Capital Management company.

In the current year, International Workplace Group plc company and Encore Capital Management company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither International Workplace Group plc company nor Encore Capital Management company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither International Workplace Group plc company nor Encore Capital Management company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither International Workplace Group plc company nor Encore Capital Management company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Encore Capital Management company nor International Workplace Group plc company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Encore Capital Management nor International Workplace Group plc holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

International Workplace Group plc company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Encore Capital Management company.

International Workplace Group plc company employs more people globally than Encore Capital Management company, reflecting its scale as a Real Estate.

Neither Encore Capital Management nor International Workplace Group plc holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Encore Capital Management nor International Workplace Group plc holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Encore Capital Management nor International Workplace Group plc holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Encore Capital Management nor International Workplace Group plc holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Encore Capital Management nor International Workplace Group plc holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Encore Capital Management nor International Workplace Group plc holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Deck Mate 1 executes firmware directly from an external EEPROM without verifying authenticity or integrity. An attacker with physical access can replace or reflash the EEPROM to run arbitrary code that persists across reboots. Because this design predates modern secure-boot or signed-update mechanisms, affected systems should be physically protected or retired from service. The vendor has not indicated that firmware updates are available for this legacy model.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

Deck Mate 2 lacks a verified secure-boot chain and runtime integrity validation for its controller and display modules. Without cryptographic boot verification, an attacker with physical access can modify or replace the bootloader, kernel, or filesystem and gain persistent code execution on reboot. This weakness allows long-term firmware tampering that survives power cycles. The vendor indicates that more recent firmware updates strengthen update-chain integrity and disable physical update ports to mitigate related attack avenues.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

Deck Mate 2's firmware update mechanism accepts packages without cryptographic signature verification, encrypts them with a single hard-coded AES key shared across devices, and uses a truncated HMAC for integrity validation. Attackers with access to the update interface - typically via the unit's USB update port - can craft or modify firmware packages to execute arbitrary code as root, allowing persistent compromise of the device's integrity and deck randomization process. Physical or on-premises access remains the most likely attack path, though network-exposed or telemetry-enabled deployments could theoretically allow remote exploitation if misconfigured. The vendor confirmed that firmware updates have been issued to correct these update-chain weaknesses and that USB update access has been disabled on affected units.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS bc-fips on All (API modules), Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java LTS bcprov-lts8on on All (API modules) allows Excessive Allocation. This vulnerability is associated with program files core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCMSIV.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA224NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA3NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHAKENativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA512NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA384NativeDigest.Java. This issue affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS: from 2.1.0 through 2.1.1; Bouncy Castle for Java LTS: from 2.73.0 through 2.73.7.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/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:P/AU:N/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Amber
Description

Wasmtime is a runtime for WebAssembly. In versions from 38.0.0 to before 38.0.3, the implementation of component-model related host-to-wasm trampolines in Wasmtime contained a bug where it's possible to carefully craft a component, which when called in a specific way, would crash the host with a segfault or assert failure. Wasmtime 38.0.3 has been released and is patched to fix this issue. There are no workarounds.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/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