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

Comparison Overview

McKinsey Risk & ResilienceMcKinsey Risk & Resilience
VS
Allied UniversalAllied Universal
McKinsey Risk & Resilience

McKinsey Risk & Resilience

N/A

Last Update: 09/04/2026

View Profile

From the board room to the engine room, McKinsey’s Risk & Resilience Practice equips organizations to boldly embrace uncertainty, embed resilience, and enable growth. We drive impact by combining a holistic view of the risk landscape with deep industry and regulatory ex...

NAICS:54
NAICS Definition:Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Allied Universal

Allied Universal

450 Exchange, Irvine, 92602, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.aus.com/
784/1000Fair

Allied Universal®, a leading security and facility services company, provides proactive security services and cutting-edge smart technology to deliver evolving, tailored solutions that allow clients to focus on their core business. Our excellence starts with our local l...

NAICS:54
NAICS Definition:Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Employees:100,086
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
McKinsey Risk & Resilience

McKinsey Risk & Resilience

-
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
Allied Universal

Allied Universal

-
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 Professional Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for McKinsey Risk & Resilience in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Professional Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Allied Universal in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - McKinsey Risk & Resilience (X = Date, Y = Severity)

McKinsey Risk & Resilience 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 - Allied Universal (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Allied Universal 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...
McKinsey Risk & Resilience

McKinsey Risk & Resilience

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Allied Universal

Allied Universal

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
ALL18427423

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2