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

Comparison Overview

Federal Capital Territory AdministrationFederal Capital Territory Administration
VS
U.S. Department of the TreasuryU.S. Department of the Treasury
Federal Capital Territory Administration

Federal Capital Territory Administration

Plot 2, Kapital Street, Area 11, Garki, 900247, NG

Last Update: 04/06/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://fcta.gov.ng
693/1000Weak

The Federal Capital Territory Administration was created on December 31, 2004 following the scrapping of the Ministry of the Federal Capital Territory (MFCT). Seven new Mandate Secretariats were created for Education, Transport, Agriculture and Rural Development, Healt...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:1,379
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
U.S. Department of the Treasury

U.S. Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, 20005, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
https://home.treasury.gov/
591/1000Very Poor

The Treasury Department is the executive agency responsible for promoting economic prosperity and ensuring the financial security of the United States. The Department is responsible for a wide range of activities such as advising the President on economic and financial ...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:14,324
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Federal Capital Territory Administration

Federal Capital Territory Administration

-
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
U.S. Department of the Treasury

U.S. Department of the Treasury

-
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 Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

Federal Capital Territory Administration has 31.51% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for U.S. Department of the Treasury in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Federal Capital Territory Administration (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Federal Capital Territory Administration cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - U.S. Department of the Treasury (X = Date, Y = Severity)

U.S. Department of the Treasury 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...
Federal Capital Territory Administration

Federal Capital Territory Administration

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
FEDIND1780590865
U.S. Department of the Treasury

U.S. Department of the Treasury

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
US-526082425
🔒 Incident : Breach
US-000030825
🔒 Incident : Breach
US-000011025

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-7654
SUMMARY

The Admin Columns plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to PHP Object Injection leading to Remote Code Execution in versions up to and including 7.0.18. This is due to the use of `unserialize()` without an `allowed_classes` restriction in the `IdsToCollection::get_ids_from_string()` function, which processes attacker-controlled post meta values without proper validation. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers with Contributor-level access and above to inject a serialized PHP object into a post's custom meta field and trigger arbitrary code execution by exploiting a bundled POP gadget chain, resulting in remote code execution as the web server user.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-05
UPDATED
Date2026-06-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-7523
SUMMARY

The Alba Board plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 2.1.3. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to access arbitrary private alba_card post data, including title, description, assignee, due date, tags, and comments, that is intended to be restricted to Administrators and Editors. The handler is registered via the wp_ajax_nopriv_ hook and its nonce is exposed to all site visitors through wp_localize_script on pages containing the [alba_board] shortcode, making this exploitable by unauthenticated users who can access any such page.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-05
UPDATED
Date2026-06-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-45409
SUMMARY

Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA) for Python provides support for Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA) and Unicode IDNA Compatibility Processing. In versions prior to 3.15, payloads such as `"\u0660" * N` or `"\u30fb" * N + "\u6f22"` utilize the `valid_contexto` function prior to length rejection, and for high values of `N` will take a long time to process. This is the same issue as CVE-2024-3651, however the original remediation in 2024 was not a complete fix. A specially crafted argument to the `idna.encode()` function could consume significant resources. This may lead to a denial-of-service. Starting in version 3.14, the function rejects long inputs as soon as practicable prior to any further processing to minimize resource consumption. In version 3.15, this approach was extended to lesser used alternate functions (i.e. per-label conversions and codec support). A workaround is available. Domain names cannot exceed 253 characters in length. If this length limit is enforced prior to passing the domain to the `idna.encode()` function, it should no longer consume significant resources. This is triggered by arbitrarily large inputs that would not occur in normal usage, but may be passed to the library assuming there is no preliminary input validation by the higher-level application.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-05
UPDATED
Date2026-06-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-11431
SUMMARY

A path traversal vulnerability exists in the Projects Service download endpoint shared by Altium Enterprise Server and Altium 365. An authenticated user can supply a crafted path parameter that bypasses validation, allowing arbitrary files (including entire directories returned as archives) to be read from the server filesystem. Because the readable files include service configuration and credential material, exploitation can be used to gather information enabling further compromise. The issue can be combined with CVE-2026-11424 to reach the cloud-side endpoint. On multi-tenant Altium 365 deployments, the readable configuration could have exposed credentials shared across services. Altium Enterprise Server is fixed in 8.1.1; the issue has been remediated in Altium 365 at the service level.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-05
UPDATED
Date2026-06-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-11429
SUMMARY

A path traversal vulnerability exists in the Git Service component shared by Altium Enterprise Server and Altium 365. The service accepts a sequence of post-clone file-manipulation operations that use user-supplied paths without validation, allowing an authenticated user with basic git access to move arbitrary files outside the intended repository area. This file-move primitive can be used to place attacker-controlled script content into directories where it is later executed by the service, resulting in remote code execution under the Git Service account. On multi-tenant Altium 365 deployments, this could have allowed access to data belonging to other tenants on the same infrastructure node. Altium Enterprise Server is fixed in 8.1.1; the issue has been remediated in Altium 365 at the service level.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-05
UPDATED
Date2026-06-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA