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

Comparison Overview

Ferguson PartnersFerguson Partners
VS
PwC DeutschlandPwC Deutschland
Ferguson Partners

Ferguson Partners

123 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 1900, None, Chicago, IL, US, 60606

Last Update: 18/03/2026

View Profile
727/1000Moderate

As a global talent management boutique serving all industries and with a strong concentration of real assets, healthcare, hospitality, and private equity clients, Ferguson Partners orchestrates the essential disciplines impacting human capital — Executive and Board Recr...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:117
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
PwC Deutschland

PwC Deutschland

Friedrich-Ebert-Anlage 35-37, Frankfurt am Main, DE, 60327

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.pwc.de
775/1000Fair

PwC is the leading auditing and consulting company in Germany. As an independent member of the international PwC network, it offers its services worldwide. PwC audits and advises leading industrial and service companies of all sizes. In Germany, over 15,000 employees g...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:11,448
Subsidiaries:79
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Ferguson Partners

Ferguson Partners

-
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
PwC Deutschland

PwC Deutschland

-
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 Ferguson Partners in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for PwC Deutschland in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Ferguson Partners (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ferguson Partners cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - PwC Deutschland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PwC Deutschland 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...
Ferguson Partners

Ferguson Partners

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
FER903072725
PwC Deutschland

PwC Deutschland

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA