Comparison Overview

Hayman Consulting Group

VS

EY-Parthenon

Hayman Consulting Group

undefined, undefined, undefined, 20854, US
Last Update: 2025-03-06 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

Go to website for current description of our scope of work.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 7
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

EY-Parthenon

1 More London Place, None, London, United Kingdom, GB, SE1 2AF
Last Update: 2025-07-27 (UTC)

Strong

Between 800 and 900

Our unique combination of transformative strategy, transactions and corporate finance delivers real-world value โ€“ solutions that work in practice, not just on paper. Benefiting from EYโ€™s full spectrum of services, weโ€™ve reimagined strategic consulting to work in a world of increasing complexity. With deep functional and sector expertise, paired with innovative AI-powered technology and an investor mindset, we partner with CEOs, boards, private equity and governments every step of the way โ€“ enabling you to shape your future with confidence. EY-Parthenon is a brand under which a number of EY member firms across the globe provide strategy consulting services. For more information, please visit ey.com/parthenon.

NAICS: 5416
NAICS Definition: Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees: 15,458
Subsidiaries: 5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Hayman Consulting Group
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ey-parthenon.jpeg
EY-Parthenon
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Hayman Consulting Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
EY-Parthenon
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hayman Consulting Group in 2025.

Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for EY-Parthenon in 2025.

Incident History โ€” Hayman Consulting Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hayman Consulting Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” EY-Parthenon (X = Date, Y = Severity)

EY-Parthenon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Hayman Consulting Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ey-parthenon.jpeg
EY-Parthenon
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-party service vulnerability
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Hayman Consulting Group company company demonstrates a stronger AI risk posture compared to EY-Parthenon company company, reflecting its advanced AI governance and monitoring frameworks.

EY-Parthenon company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Hayman Consulting Group company has not reported any.

In the current year, EY-Parthenon company and Hayman Consulting Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither EY-Parthenon company nor Hayman Consulting Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

EY-Parthenon company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Hayman Consulting Group company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither EY-Parthenon company nor Hayman Consulting Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Hayman Consulting Group company nor EY-Parthenon company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

EY-Parthenon company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Hayman Consulting Group company.

EY-Parthenon company employs more people globally than Hayman Consulting Group company, reflecting its scale as a Business Consulting and Services.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Formbricks is an open source qualtrics alternative. Prior to version 4.0.1, Formbricks is missing JWT signature verification. This vulnerability stems from a token validation routine that only decodes JWTs (jwt.decode) without verifying their signatures. Both the email verification token login path and the password reset server action use the same validator, which does not check the tokenโ€™s signature, expiration, issuer, or audience. If an attacker learns the victimโ€™s actual user.id, they can craft an arbitrary JWT with an alg: "none" header and use it to authenticate and reset the victimโ€™s password. This issue has been patched in version 4.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

Apollo Studio Embeddable Explorer & Embeddable Sandbox are website embeddable software solutions from Apollo GraphQL. Prior to Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3, a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability was identified. The vulnerability arises from missing origin validation in the client-side code that handles window.postMessage events. A malicious website can send forged messages to the embedding page, causing the victimโ€™s browser to execute arbitrary GraphQL queries or mutations against their GraphQL server while authenticated with the victimโ€™s cookies. This issue has been patched in Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /consulta-dispensas. Such manipulation leads to improper authorization. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

A weakness has been identified in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected is an unknown function of the file /module/Api/aluno. This manipulation of the argument aluno_id causes improper authorization. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

A security flaw has been discovered in Tencent WeKnora 0.1.0. This impacts the function testEmbeddingModel of the file /api/v1/initialization/embedding/test. The manipulation of the argument baseUrl results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component. The vendor responds: "We have confirmed that the issue mentioned in the report does not exist in the latest releases".

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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