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

Comparison Overview

Forescout Technologies Inc.Forescout Technologies Inc.
VS
CrowdStrikeCrowdStrike
Forescout Technologies Inc.

Forescout Technologies Inc.

300 Santana Row, San Jose, 95128, US

Last Update: 01/05/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.forescout.com
758/1000Fair

For more than 25 years, Fortune 100 organizations, government agencies, and large enterprises have trusted Forescout as their foundation to manage cyber risk, ensure compliance, and mitigate threats. The Forescout 4D Platform™ delivers comprehensive asset intelligence, ...

NAICS:541514
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:1,317
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
CrowdStrike

CrowdStrike

Remote, US

Last Update: 03/07/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
http://www.crowdstrike.com
578/1000Very Poor

CrowdStrike (Nasdaq: CRWD), a global cybersecurity leader, has redefined modern security with the world’s most advanced cloud-native platform for protecting critical areas of enterprise risk — endpoints and cloud workloads, identity and data. Powered by the CrowdStrike...

NAICS:541514
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:11,601
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
6
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
4

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Forescout Technologies Inc.

Forescout Technologies Inc.

-
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
CrowdStrike

CrowdStrike

-
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 Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)

Forescout Technologies Inc. has 10.71% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)

CrowdStrike has 466.04% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Forescout Technologies Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Forescout Technologies Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

CrowdStrike 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...
Forescout Technologies Inc.

Forescout Technologies Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
FOR1777631221
CrowdStrike

CrowdStrike

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MICSENKASESECRO1782073479
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MARBYBCRO1777746530
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
CRO1776846395

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2