Comparison Overview

MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications)

VS

C2C

MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications)

1450 Oakbrook Dr, Norcross, GA, 30093, US
Last Update: 2025-11-26
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://mgt.us

MGT is a national technology and advisory solutions leader serving state, local government, education (SLED) and targeted commercial clients. Our specialized solutions solve the most critical issues that live at the top of our clients’ leadership agenda. We partner to help clients build resilience, implement systematic change and strengthen their foundations, now and for the future. MGT is committed to impacting communities for good. Layer 3 Communications, now MGT, is an engineering firm that specializes in providing complex network services and products. Along with its hosted solutions, the company provides its customers design, management, optimization and ongoing support of network infrastructure and security (including real-time monitoring and zero-day threat mitigation). Our philosophical approach involves using capital (people, processes and technology) to solve problems.

NAICS: 51125
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 111
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

C2C

1 bis rue du Meunier, ROISSY EN FRANCE, FR, 95700
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799
https://www.c2c-reseaux.fr/

C2C est un intégrateur spécialisé dans les systèmes de communication Réseau IP couvrant les domaines des Infrastructures de câblage, le Wireless, les solutions de Vidéo Protection et Contrôle d’Accès. Depuis 1996, C2C maintient et développe ses compétences avec un suivi permanent de l’évolution des débits, des protocoles de communication, des normes et une action de veille technologique qui nous permettent de vous conseiller sur les solutions les plus innovantes.

NAICS: 51125
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 141
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/layer-3-communications.jpeg
MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications)
—
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/c2c.jpeg
C2C
—
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
MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications)
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
C2C
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Computer Networking Products Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) in 2025.

Incidents vs Computer Networking Products Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for C2C in 2025.

Incident History — MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — C2C (X = Date, Y = Severity)

C2C cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/layer-3-communications.jpeg
MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications)
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/c2c.jpeg
C2C
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company and C2C company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, C2C company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company.

In the current year, C2C company and MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither C2C company nor MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither C2C company nor MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither C2C company nor MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company nor C2C company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) nor C2C holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company nor C2C company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

C2C company employs more people globally than MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) company, reflecting its scale as a Computer Networking Products.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) nor C2C holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) nor C2C holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) nor C2C holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) nor C2C holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) nor C2C holds HIPAA certification.

Neither MGT (formerly Layer 3 Communications) nor C2C holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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
References
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
References
Description

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
References
Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
References