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

Comparison Overview

J & P Richardson UtilitiesJ & P Richardson Utilities
VS
Parsons CorporationParsons Corporation
J & P Richardson Utilities

J & P Richardson Utilities

114 Campbell Avenue, WACOL, 4076, AU

Last Update: 18/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jpr.com.au
756/1000Fair

JPR UTILITIES J & P Richardson Industries (JPR) offers design, construction, engineering, in house manufacturing, electrical installation and 24/7 maintenance and breakdown support. We are also a RTO, offering a broad range of nationally accredited and non accredited co...

NAICS:237
NAICS Definition:Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:81
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Parsons Corporation

Parsons Corporation

14291 Park Meadow Dr, Chantilly, Virginia, US, 20151

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.parsons.com
799/1000Fair

Founded in 1944, Parsons Corporation, a digitally enabled solutions provider, is focused on creating the future of the defense, intelligence, and critical infrastructure markets. From Earth to outer space, we deliver tomorrow’s solutions today. Equipped with the capabil...

NAICS:237
NAICS Definition:Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Employees:21,663
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
J & P Richardson Utilities

J & P Richardson Utilities

-
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
Parsons Corporation

Parsons Corporation

-
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 Civil Engineering Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for J & P Richardson Utilities in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Civil Engineering Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Parsons Corporation in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - J & P Richardson Utilities (X = Date, Y = Severity)

J & P Richardson Utilities cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Parsons Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Parsons Corporation 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...
J & P Richardson Utilities

J & P Richardson Utilities

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Parsons Corporation

Parsons Corporation

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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