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

Comparison Overview

Intact Public EntitiesIntact Public Entities
VS
GallagherGallagher
Intact Public Entities

Intact Public Entities

278 Pinebush Rd, Cambridge, Ontario, N1T 1Z6, CA

Last Update: 20/01/2026

View Profile
752/1000Fair

Intact Public Entities is a leader in providing specialized insurance programs, including risk management and claims services to municipal, public administration and community service organizations across Canada. Proven industry knowledge, gained through over nine deca...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:175
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Gallagher

Gallagher

2850 Golf Road, Rolling Meadows, 60008, US

Last Update: 19/07/2026

View Profile
771/1000Fair

Gallagher, a global insurance brokerage, risk management, and consulting firm, serves communities around the globe, helping clients address risk, protecting assets, and recovering from losses. The products and services we provide keep businesses and institutions running...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:46,421
Subsidiaries:22
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Intact Public Entities

Intact Public Entities

-
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
Gallagher

Gallagher

-
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 Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Intact Public Entities in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gallagher in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Intact Public Entities (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Intact Public Entities cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Gallagher cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Intact Public Entities

Intact Public Entities

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Gallagher

Gallagher

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
GAL24413322
🔒 Incident : Breach
GAL849072625
🔒 Incident : Breach
GAL049072425

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-8325
SUMMARY

A maliciously crafted PDF file, when parsed through Autodesk Revit, can force an Out-of-Bounds Write vulnerability. A malicious actor may leverage this vulnerability to cause a crash, cause data corruption, or execute arbitrary code in the context of the current process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-06
UPDATED
Date2026-08-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-7867
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in udisks2. A local attacker with an active console session can exploit insufficient authorization checking on the 'as-user' option in the org.freedesktop.UDisks2.Filesystem.Mount() D-Bus method. This allows the attacker to spoof the 'as-user' parameter, mounting filesystems on behalf of arbitrary users, including privileged accounts. This can lead to local privilege escalation through mount point injection and manipulation of the mount namespace visible to privileged users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-06
UPDATED
Date2026-08-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-7406
SUMMARY

A maliciously crafted BMP file, when parsed through certain Autodesk products, can force a Untrusted Pointer Dereference vulnerability. A malicious actor can leverage this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code in the context of the current process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-06
UPDATED
Date2026-08-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-7405
SUMMARY

A maliciously crafted TIF file, when parsed through certain Autodesk products during image import, can cause an Out-of-Bounds Read in the image handling library. A malicious actor can leverage this vulnerability to cause a denial of service

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-06
UPDATED
Date2026-08-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-71555
SUMMARY

PILOS (Platform for Interactive Live-Online Seminars) is a frontend for BigBlueButton. From 2.1.0 until 4.14.1, PILOS does not send a Cross-Origin-Opener-Policy response header, so pages opened by PILOS via a link that opens a new browsing context (e.g., target="_blank") retain a window.opener reference back to the originating PILOS tab. A malicious destination page reached this way can use window.opener to navigate or manipulate the original PILOS tab, a technique known as reverse tabnabbing, potentially redirecting an authenticated user to a phishing page that mimics PILOS. This issue is fixed in version 4.14.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-06
UPDATED
Date2026-08-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3