Comparison Overview

Gi Group

VS

Manpower

Gi Group

Piazza IV Novembre, 5, Milan, MI, undefined, IT
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 800 and 849

Welcome to Gi Group! Your job, Our work! Gi Group is one of the world’s leading companies providing a full range of HR Services. We offer Temporary, Permanent and Professional Staffing Services, Search & Selection and Executive Search as well as Outsourcing, Training, Outplacement and HR Consultancy. It is our mission to contribute to the evolution of the labour market and to emphasize the personal and social value of work. We aim to support people at each stage of their professional career and be at our clients’ side as their businesses grow. Thanks to direct presence and strategic partnerships, we operate in more than 57 countries across Europe, APAC, Americas and Africa. With a team of more than 4.000 colleagues around the world, our global model, solutions and our expertise in a full range of industries and sectors, we are able to provide valuable specialized services to both international and local customers. Ranked globally as one of the largest staffing firms by Staffing Industry Analysts, we are also a global corporate member of the World Employment Federation. In 2021, Gi Group Holding achieved a turnover of more than 3.2 billion euros. Do you want to know more about Gi Group and what we can do for you? Get in touch with us!

NAICS: 5613
NAICS Definition: Employment Services
Employees: 15,729
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Manpower

100 Manpower Place, Milwaukee, WI, US, 53212
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 700 and 749

Manpower is the global leader in contingent and permanent recruitment workforce solutions. We provide the agility businesses need with a continuum of staffing solutions. By leveraging our trusted brands, we have built a deeper talent pool to provide our clients access to the people they need, faster. We effectively assess and develop skills, keeping our associates ahead of the curve, so they can get the jobs done each time, every time.

NAICS: 5613
NAICS Definition: Employment Services
Employees: 29,591
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gi-group.jpeg
Gi Group
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/manpower-.jpeg
Manpower
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Gi Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Manpower
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Staffing and Recruiting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gi Group in 2026.

Incidents vs Staffing and Recruiting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Manpower in 2026.

Incident History — Gi Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gi Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Manpower (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Manpower cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gi-group.jpeg
Gi Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/manpower-.jpeg
Manpower
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Theft, Extortion
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Gi Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Manpower company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Manpower company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Gi Group company has not reported any.

In the current year, Manpower company and Gi Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Manpower company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Gi Group company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Manpower company nor Gi Group company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Manpower company nor Gi Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Gi Group company nor Manpower company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Gi Group nor Manpower holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Gi Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Manpower company.

Manpower company employs more people globally than Gi Group company, reflecting its scale as a Staffing and Recruiting.

Neither Gi Group nor Manpower holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Gi Group nor Manpower holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Gi Group nor Manpower holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Gi Group nor Manpower holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Gi Group nor Manpower holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Gi Group nor Manpower holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N