Example Corp.
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 0 and 549
None
NAICS: 5412
NAICS Definition: Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll Services
Employees: 1
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
8
Attack type number
4
Comparison Overview
Example Corp.
VS
RSM US LLP
RSM US LLP
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799
Stay Alert: Avoid Recruitment Scams Across industries, cybercriminals are posing as company recruiters using fake job postings and employment offers to trick people into providing personal information or payment. Be alert and never provide personal/financial information or payment to anyone claiming to offer a job opportunity. During the recruiting process, RSM US will never: • Ask you for payment to process documents, purchase equipment, or for any other reason. • Request your banking or credit card information • Send you a check to purchase your own equipment If you believe you are a victim of a job scam, it’s recommended that you report it to law enforcement, contact your financial institution and notify the website in which the job was listed. --- RSM is the leading provider of assurance, tax and consulting services to the middle market. With over 17,000 professionals across the U.S. and Canada and a global presence in 120 countries, our purpose is to deliver the power of being understood to our clients, colleagues and communities. As first-choice advisors, we are focused on developing leading professionals and innovative services to meet our clients’ evolving needs in today’s ever-changing business environment. At RSM, we strive to deeply understand the full picture of an employee’s individual skills and passions. Our culture empowers you to own your career to reach your goals and make a meaningful impact on the world around you. Gain limitless opportunities to grow forward personally and professionally. Don’t just go forward. #GrowForwardatRSM For more information, visit rsmus.com Learn how you can #GrowForwardatRSM visit www.rsmus.com/careers
NAICS: 5412
NAICS Definition: Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll Services
Employees: 19,336
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Compliance Badges Comparison
Security & Compliance Standards Overview
Example Corp.
ISO 27001
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
Not verified
GDPR
Not verified
PCI DSS
Not verified
HIPAA
Not verified
RSM US LLP
ISO 27001
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
Not verified
GDPR
Not verified
PCI DSS
Not verified
HIPAA
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Example Corp.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
RSM US LLP
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Accounting Industry Average (This Year)
Example Corp. has 13.64% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Accounting Industry Average (This Year)
No incidents recorded for RSM US LLP in 2025.
Incident History — Example Corp. (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Example Corp. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Incident History — RSM US LLP (X = Date, Y = Severity)
RSM US LLP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Notable Incidents
Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company
FAQ
RSM US LLP company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Example Corp. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.
Example Corp. company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas RSM US LLP company has not reported any.
In the current year, Example Corp. company has reported more cyber incidents than RSM US LLP company.
Example Corp. company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while RSM US LLP company has not reported such incidents publicly.
Example Corp. company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other RSM US LLP company has not reported such incidents publicly.
Example Corp. company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while RSM US LLP company has not reported such incidents publicly.
Example Corp. company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while RSM US LLP company has not reported such incidents publicly.
Neither Example Corp. nor RSM US LLP holds any compliance certifications.
Neither company holds any compliance certifications.
RSM US LLP company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Example Corp. company.
RSM US LLP company employs more people globally than Example Corp. company, reflecting its scale as a Accounting.
Neither Example Corp. nor RSM US LLP holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.
Neither Example Corp. nor RSM US LLP holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.
Neither Example Corp. nor RSM US LLP holds ISO 27001 certification.
Neither Example Corp. nor RSM US LLP holds PCI DSS certification.
Neither Example Corp. nor RSM US LLP holds HIPAA certification.
Neither Example Corp. nor RSM US LLP 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
References
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/0276479e7d0e280e0f8d26fa567d3b7aa97a516f
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/05fe6686a97fa0bcd3cf157805b3612033f975bc
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/3240d856d942727372a705252f7c8c115394a41e
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/19.2.16
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/20.3.14
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/21.0.1
- https://github.com/angular/angular/security/advisories/GHSA-58c5-g7wp-6w37
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
