Comparison Overview

Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços

VS

Liderman

Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços

Avenida Professor Francisco Morato 525, São Paulo, 05513-000, BR
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

One of the largest companies in the professional services and security markets in Brazil. Formed by four branches, patrimonial security, personal security, electronic security and general services. Counting with around 16.000 employees, Gocil is present at several brazillian states and offers its services to different segments, as medical, oil&gas, retail, industry, shopping centers, etc

NAICS: 5616
NAICS Definition: Investigation and Security Services
Employees: 10,826
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Liderman

Av. Defensores del Morro 1620 - Chorrillos Lima, Lima 09, PE
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 750 and 799

“Somos la empresa de seguridad de mayor prestigio en el Perú" Comenzamos en el año 1989, con solo 4 hombres de Seguridad, que creyeron en nuestro estilo de liderazgo y decidieron apostar por la PASIÓN, darle SENTIDO de PROPÓSITO a nuestras vidas y hacer algo DIFERENTE en el sector. Durante estos más de 30 años, nos hemos enfocado en el CORAZÓN de nuestros LIDERMAN, en ganarnos su COMPROMISO, velar por su CRECIMIENTO profesional y CALIDAD de VIDA familiar. Sentido de Propósito: ¡Todo lo que hagamos o digamos, sea para hacer feliz y el bien al otro!! Visión: Brindar un servicio especializado, priorizando la calidad, cuidado del medio ambiente, protección de la vida y salud; para superar las necesidades conocidas y no descubiertas aún, de nuestros clientes. Misión: Recibir de los clientes la delegación de los asuntos de seguridad y atenderlos con máxima eficiencia. Valores: Honestidad Creatividad e Innovación. Solidaridad. Comunicación. Vocación de Servicio. Trabajo en Equipo. Sentido del Humor.

NAICS: 561
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 10,001
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gocil-seguranca-e-servicos.jpeg
Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços
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/liderman.jpeg
Liderman
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
Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Liderman
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Security and Investigations Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços in 2025.

Incidents vs Security and Investigations Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Liderman in 2025.

Incident History — Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Liderman cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gocil-seguranca-e-servicos.jpeg
Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/liderman.jpeg
Liderman
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Liderman company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Liderman company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company.

In the current year, Liderman company and Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Liderman company nor Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Liderman company nor Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Liderman company nor Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company nor Liderman company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços nor Liderman holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Liderman company.

Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços company employs more people globally than Liderman company, reflecting its scale as a Security and Investigations.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços nor Liderman holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços nor Liderman holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços nor Liderman holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços nor Liderman holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços nor Liderman holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Gocil Tecnologia em Segurança e Serviços nor Liderman 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