Comparison Overview

Iowa PC Services, Inc.

VS

Reviver

Iowa PC Services, Inc.

2520 Mansfield Drive, Des Moines, IA, US, 50317
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Iowa PC Services, Inc. provides you with all the services you need to keep your computer running its best. We’re happy to answer your questions, and help in any way we can. If you have an emergency, such as a computer that will not boot, or a hard drive that has crashed, call us for professional assistance in recovering your data and setting things right.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 4
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Reviver

4170 Douglas Blvd, Granite Bay, California, 95746, US
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 650 and 699

Reviver is a technology company and developer of the first-of-its-kind digital license plate platform. We are on a mission to modernize the driving experience. Our team is transforming the license plate into a platform for connected vehicles through the RPlate, the first digital license plate, enables mobile registration renewal, personalization, location and safety features, and more. The RPlate is now DMV-approved for use on consumer and commercial vehicles.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 266
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/iowa-pc-services-inc..jpeg
Iowa PC Services, Inc.
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/reviverauto.jpeg
Reviver
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
Iowa PC Services, Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Reviver
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Computer Hardware Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Iowa PC Services, Inc. in 2025.

Incidents vs Computer Hardware Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Reviver in 2025.

Incident History — Iowa PC Services, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Iowa PC Services, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Reviver cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/iowa-pc-services-inc..jpeg
Iowa PC Services, Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/reviverauto.jpeg
Reviver
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Motivation: Evasion of tolls, Evasion of traffic violations, Impersonation of other vehicles
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Unauthorized alteration of digital license plates
Motivation: Evasion of tolls, Evasion of traffic tickets, Impersonation
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Firmware Rewriting
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Iowa PC Services, Inc. company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Reviver company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Reviver company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Iowa PC Services, Inc. company has not reported any.

In the current year, Reviver company and Iowa PC Services, Inc. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Reviver company nor Iowa PC Services, Inc. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Reviver company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Iowa PC Services, Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Reviver company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Iowa PC Services, Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Reviver company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Iowa PC Services, Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. nor Reviver holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. company nor Reviver company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Reviver company employs more people globally than Iowa PC Services, Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Computer Hardware.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. nor Reviver holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. nor Reviver holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. nor Reviver holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. nor Reviver holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. nor Reviver holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Iowa PC Services, Inc. nor Reviver 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