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

Comparison Overview

JP GrayJP Gray
VS
AerotekAerotek
JP Gray

JP Gray

Gustav Mahlerlaan 38, Amsterdam, 1082 MC, NL

Last Update: 04/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jpgray.com
758/1000Fair

Forging strategic connections to optimise business performance JP Gray is a Business Operations specialist, part of SThree, the global STEM workforce consultancy. With expertise in finance and HR, customer services, supply chain, business and sales support, JP Gray adv...

NAICS:5613
NAICS Definition:Employment Services
Employees:118
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Aerotek

Aerotek

7301 Parkway Dr, Hanover, 21076, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.aerotek.com
695/1000Weak

From economic headwinds to talent complexities, the challenges facing North American industry are real. To rise to this moment, Aerotek® Inc. helps companies, and careers evolve. Aerotek provides staffing and services solutions in manufacturing, logistics, constructio...

NAICS:5613
NAICS Definition:Employment Services
Employees:20,369
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
JP Gray

JP Gray

-
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
Aerotek

Aerotek

-
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 Staffing and Recruiting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for JP Gray in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Staffing and Recruiting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Aerotek in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - JP Gray (X = Date, Y = Severity)

JP Gray 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 - Aerotek (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Aerotek 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...
JP Gray

JP Gray

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Aerotek

Aerotek

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
ALLTEKAERMAR1771086448

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9