Comparison Overview

Gibbs & Cox Australia

VS

Atkins

Gibbs & Cox Australia

53 Wentworth Avenue, Leidos Australia Building, L1, Kingston, Australian Capital Territory, AU, 2621
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

Leidos Gibbs & Cox Australia provide naval architecture, marine engineering, shipbuilding, nuclear engineering, and maritime infrastructure engineering across the system lifecycle. Our capabilities include ships, submarines, boats, marine autonomous systems, and construction and sustainment infrastructure.

NAICS: 54139
NAICS Definition: Engineering Services
Employees: 15
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Atkins

Ashley Road, Epsom, KT18 5BW, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Atkins is now AtkinsRéalis. Please follow AtkinsRéalis on LinkedIn. We are a world-class engineering services and nuclear organization. We connect people, data and technology to transform the world’s infrastructure and energy systems. Together, with our industry partners and clients, and our global team of consultants, designers, engineers and project managers, we can change the world. Please follow our page AtkinsRéalis on LinkedIn for all content: https://www.linkedin.com/company/atkinsrealis

NAICS: 54139
NAICS Definition: Engineering Services
Employees: 10,364
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gibbs-cox-australia.jpeg
Gibbs & Cox Australia
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/atkins.jpeg
Atkins
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
Gibbs & Cox Australia
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Atkins
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Engineering Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gibbs & Cox Australia in 2025.

Incidents vs Engineering Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Atkins in 2025.

Incident History — Gibbs & Cox Australia (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gibbs & Cox Australia cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Atkins cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gibbs-cox-australia.jpeg
Gibbs & Cox Australia
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2017
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/atkins.jpeg
Atkins
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Atkins company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Gibbs & Cox Australia company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Gibbs & Cox Australia company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Atkins company has not reported any.

In the current year, Atkins company and Gibbs & Cox Australia company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Atkins company nor Gibbs & Cox Australia company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Gibbs & Cox Australia company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Atkins company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Atkins company nor Gibbs & Cox Australia company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia company nor Atkins company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia nor Atkins holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Atkins company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Gibbs & Cox Australia company.

Atkins company employs more people globally than Gibbs & Cox Australia company, reflecting its scale as a Engineering Services.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia nor Atkins holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia nor Atkins holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia nor Atkins holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia nor Atkins holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia nor Atkins holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Gibbs & Cox Australia nor Atkins holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H