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

Comparison Overview

FlockFlock
VS
TÜV Rheinland GroupTÜV Rheinland Group
Flock

Flock

Atlanta, Georgia, US

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile
422/1000Critical

Flock Safety is the leading public safety platform designed to help communities prevent and reduce crime, not just respond to it. We partner with cities, law enforcement agencies, schools, businesses, and neighborhoods to deliver real-time, objective intelligence that h...

NAICS:92219
NAICS Definition:Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
Employees:1,443
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
4
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
2
TÜV Rheinland Group

TÜV Rheinland Group

Am Grauen Stein, Cologne, 51105, DE

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.tuv.com/impressum
726/1000Moderate

Neutral, independent third party For more than 150 years, TÜV Rheinland has stood for ensuring quality, safety, and efficiency in conjunction with people, the environment, and technology. As a neutral, independent third party, we test, accompany, develop, promote and ...

NAICS:92219
NAICS Definition:Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
Employees:17,587
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Flock

Flock

-
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
TÜV Rheinland Group

TÜV Rheinland Group

-
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 Public Safety Industry Avg (This Year)

Flock has 163.16% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Public Safety Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for TÜV Rheinland Group in 2026.

Incidents

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

Flock cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - TÜV Rheinland Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

TÜV Rheinland Group 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...
Flock

Flock

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
FLO1789245053
🔒 Incident : Breach
FLO1782132974
🔒 Incident : Breach
FLOVEN1772764366
TÜV Rheinland Group

TÜV Rheinland Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
TUV1765188618

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-85893
SUMMARY

Use after free in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-69486
SUMMARY

Heap-based buffer overflow in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2025-11395
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Podman. If an attacker can pass a crafted tar archive to the `podman load` command, they can create files on the host machine with the privileges of the user running Podman.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-92259
SUMMARY

Integer overflow or wraparound vulnerability in Samsung Opensource Escargot allows attackers with write access to the bytecode-cache directory to cause a heap-based buffer overflow and denial of service via a crafted cache file. This issue affects Escargot: ac94df78493ee6fede286620d94f724e46b4d238.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-92257
SUMMARY

Netcore NR255-V version 1.5.130703 contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in L7 content management pages that use eval() sinks, affecting the call board text and policy group handling components. Attackers can inject persistent script payloads through these pages to have malicious code executed in the context of other users viewing the affected content.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3