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

Comparison Overview

Latrobe City CouncilLatrobe City Council
VS
City of AmsterdamCity of Amsterdam
Latrobe City Council

Latrobe City Council

141 Commercial Rd, Morwell, Victoria, 3840, AU

Last Update: 19/04/2026

View Profile
762/1000Fair

Latrobe City is located approximately 150kms east of Melbourne and is one of Victoria's major regional centres, home to around 74,000 people. Our region is made up of four central towns: Churchill, Moe Newborough, Morwell, Traralgon and the smaller rural townships o...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:379
Subsidiaries:37
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
City of Amsterdam

City of Amsterdam

Postbus 202, Amsterdam, 1000 AE, NL

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.amsterdam.nl
788/1000Fair

Working for Amsterdam means working for the most beautiful city in the world. Think of its rich history, the role Amsterdam plays internationally, and events such as Sail, Gay Pride and King’s Day. Of course everybody wants to visit Amsterdam, or work or live here. As ...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:19,929
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Latrobe City Council

Latrobe City Council

-
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
City of Amsterdam

City of Amsterdam

-
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 Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Latrobe City Council in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for City of Amsterdam in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Latrobe City Council (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Latrobe City Council cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - City of Amsterdam (X = Date, Y = Severity)

City of Amsterdam 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...
Latrobe City Council

Latrobe City Council

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
City of Amsterdam

City of Amsterdam

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-26422
SUMMARY

clash-verge-service-ipc before 2.3.0 has a world-reachable IPC endpoint, leading to local privilege escalation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-06
UPDATED
Date2026-06-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.5
CVE-2026-11441
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in theonedev onedev up to 15.0.5. This vulnerability affects the function canAccessIssue of the file /issues/ of the component Pull Request Handler. Such manipulation of the argument issue leads to improper authorization. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. Upgrading to version 15.0.6 is able to resolve this issue. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-06
UPDATED
Date2026-06-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-11440
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in theonedev onedev up to 15.0.5. This affects an unknown part of the file /repositories/{projectId}/default-branch of the component REST API. This manipulation of the argument project.defaultBranch causes improper authorization. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. Upgrading to version 15.0.6 is able to mitigate this issue. Upgrading the affected component is advised.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-06
UPDATED
Date2026-06-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-11439
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in theonedev onedev up to 15.0.5. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /projects/ of the component Parent Project Handler. The manipulation of the argument project.parentId results in improper authorization. The attack may be performed from remote. Upgrading to version 15.0.6 can resolve this issue. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-06
UPDATED
Date2026-06-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-11438
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in theonedev onedev up to 15.0.5. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /projects. The manipulation of the argument project.forkedFromId leads to improper authorization. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. Upgrading to version 15.0.6 addresses this issue. Upgrading the affected component is recommended.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-06
UPDATED
Date2026-06-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8