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 IndustriesJ & P Richardson Industries
VS
Turner Construction CompanyTurner Construction Company
J & P Richardson Industries

J & P Richardson Industries

114 Campbell Avenue, WACOL, QLD, 4076, AU

Last Update: 03/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jpr.com.au
751/1000Fair

ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEERS SINCE 1958. Today backed by the digital transformation and energy transition platform of Vinci Energies. J & P Richardson Industries (JPR) is one of Australia's longest established electrical contracting and engineering firms, offer...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:114
Subsidiaries:67
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Turner Construction Company

Turner Construction Company

66 Hudson Blvd E, New York, 10001, US

Last Update: 21/09/2026

View Profile
702/1000Moderate

Turner is a North America-based, international construction services company and is a leading builder in diverse and numerous market segments. The company has earned recognition for undertaking large, complex projects, fostering innovation, embracing emerging technologi...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:20,423
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
J & P Richardson Industries

J & P Richardson Industries

-
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
Turner Construction Company

Turner Construction Company

-
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 Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

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

Incidents

Incidents vs Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

Turner Construction Company has 1.96% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

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

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

Incident History - Turner Construction Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Turner Construction Company 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...
J & P Richardson Industries

J & P Richardson Industries

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Turner Construction Company

Turner Construction Company

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
TUR1787430343
🔒 Incident : Breach
TUR147072625

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-89096
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in nfs-utils. An unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) by sending repeated state notification requests to an exposed rpc.statd service. The service fails to properly release memory allocated during callback processing, leading to continuous memory growth. Sustained requests can exhaust system resources, eventually causing the service to degrade or crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
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:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-89088
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow exists in libparted's file system resizing logic when handling FAT16 volumes. By convincing a user or administrator to resize a specially crafted FAT16 file system image with malformed directory metadata, an attacker can trigger an oversized read into a fixed-size memory buffer. This issue causes memory corruption, resulting in an application crash and a denial of service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
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-2026-89085
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow can occur when processing a specially crafted FAT32 filesystem due to an integer calculation error during buffer allocation. A local attacker could exploit this by enticing a user or automated service to open a malicious filesystem image, resulting in an application crash leading to a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential memory corruption.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-17591
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in libarchive. An attacker can cause a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential information disclosure due to a use-after-free vulnerability, which occurs when a program reads memory that has already been released. This issue arises when the archive_entry_copy_mac_metadata() function deallocates an internal buffer before completing a data copy. An attacker who can supply input to an application utilizing this function can trigger the flaw to crash the application or read uninitialized memory data.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1
CVE-2026-111802
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Nautilus. When a removable drive or disk image is unmounted or ejected, Nautilus prompts the user to empty the trash without verifying whether the trash directory paths are symbolic links. An attacker can exploit this flaw by tricking a user into mounting a crafted storage volume and confirming the prompt to empty the trash, leading to the arbitrary deletion of files accessible to that user.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.3