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

Comparison Overview

Manpower Business ProfessionalsManpower Business Professionals
VS
Gi GroupGi Group
Manpower Business Professionals

Manpower Business Professionals

Düsseldorfer Straße 9, Eschborn, Hessen, 65760, DE

Last Update: 07/02/2026

View Profile
757/1000Fair

Die Karriereplattform für den kaufmännischen Bereich: Manpower Professional. Manpower ist der weltweit führende Anbieter von Personallösungen für Personalvermittlung in Festanstellung und Arbeitnehmerüberlassung. Mit Manpower Business Professionals gehen wir noch einen...

NAICS:561
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:68
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Gi Group

Gi Group

Piazza IV Novembre, 5, Milan, MI, IT

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.gigroup.com
810/1000Good

Welcome to Gi Group! Your job, Our work! Gi Group is one of the world’s leading companies providing a full range of HR Services. We offer Temporary, Permanent and Professional Staffing Services, Search & Selection and Executive Search as well as Outsourcing, Training,...

NAICS:5613
NAICS Definition:Employment Services
Employees:17,107
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Manpower Business Professionals

Manpower Business Professionals

-
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
Gi Group

Gi Group

-
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 Manpower Business Professionals in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Staffing and Recruiting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gi Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Manpower Business Professionals (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Manpower Business Professionals cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Gi Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gi Group 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...
Manpower Business Professionals

Manpower Business Professionals

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Gi Group

Gi Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-105761
SUMMARY

Dify is an open-source LLM app development platform. Prior to 1.16.0, the PUT /console/api/apps/<app_id>/server endpoint in api/controllers/console/app/mcp_server.py used AppMCPServerController.put() to retrieve an AppMCPServer by the client-supplied server ID without verifying that the server belonged to the requested application and tenant. An authenticated workspace member could therefore change another application's MCP server status and parameters, potentially redirecting data or disabling the service. This issue is fixed in version 1.16.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-105760
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, a caller can use the request-level media_io_kwargs field to select the GLMGA video backend and supply large values for the fps and max_frames options without a strict work ceiling. GLMGA constructs and deduplicates an attacker-sized pre-decode frame-index list, allowing a compact request and tiny valid video to consume disproportionate CPU time and memory in the shared media-loading executor. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105759
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, the Rust frontend's track_http_metrics middleware records the raw HTTP method token as a Prometheus label for requests reaching registered routes. An unauthenticated attacker can send unique arbitrary method tokens to unguarded routes such as /tokenize, causing Prometheus's Family::get_or_create function to permanently create counter and histogram label sets. Those label sets increase process memory usage and enlarge the /metrics response until the service or monitoring path is exhausted. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
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-2026-105758
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. From 0.24.0 until 0.30.0, the Qwen2VLVideoBackend and Qwen3VLVideoBackend classes accept request-level values for the media_io_kwargs.video.max_frames and media_io_kwargs.video.fps fields without enforcing server-side ceilings. An unauthenticated caller can submit these values to the /tokenize endpoint, causing the sampler to decode every frame selected from attacker-controlled video input, consume disproportionate frontend memory, and potentially terminate the API process before scheduling or admission control. The Rust frontend is not affected because it rejects the media_io_kwargs field. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105757
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, structured-output request failures can escape request-scoped validation and reach the EngineCore fatal-error path. A per-request backend mismatch can re-raise a grammar compilation exception, padding produced by the ngram_gpu speculative-decoding mode can pass a negative token to guidance validation, and the Rust frontend can admit empty structured-output values that the Python frontend rejects, allowing ordinary constrained-generation requests to terminate the shared engine. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8