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

Comparison Overview

Hikvision HiWatch SeriesHikvision HiWatch Series
VS
G4SG4S
Hikvision HiWatch Series

Hikvision HiWatch Series

Calle de la Almazara, 9, Tres Cantos, 28760, ES

Last Update: 05/02/2026

View Profile
759/1000Fair

Hikvision es el proveedor líder en la industria de soluciones de videovigilancia. Con la plantilla más amplia en I+D, Hikvision utiliza sus plantas de fabricación de vanguardia para diseñar y desarrollar productos de CCTV y videovigilancia innovadores para cualquier nec...

NAICS:5616
NAICS Definition:Investigation and Security Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:46
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
G4S

G4S

6th Floor, London, SW1H 0DB, GB

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.g4s.com
823/1000Good

G4S is a leading security and facility services company that provides proactive security services and cutting-edge smart technology to deliver tailored, integrated security solutions that allow clients to focus on their core business. Through a global workforce of appro...

NAICS:5616
NAICS Definition:Investigation and Security Services
Employees:114,593
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Hikvision HiWatch Series

Hikvision HiWatch Series

-
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
G4S

G4S

-
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 Security and Investigations Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hikvision HiWatch Series in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Security and Investigations Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for G4S in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Hikvision HiWatch Series (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hikvision HiWatch Series cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - G4S (X = Date, Y = Severity)

G4S cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Hikvision HiWatch Series

Hikvision HiWatch Series

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
G4S

G4S

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series company and G4S company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series and G4S, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series and G4S, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Hikvision HiWatch Series or G4S ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Hikvision HiWatch Series or G4S ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series and G4S, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Hikvision HiWatch Series and G4S, 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