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

Comparison Overview

Michigan Gaming Control BoardMichigan Gaming Control Board
VS
State of OregonState of Oregon
Michigan Gaming Control Board

Michigan Gaming Control Board

3062 W Grand Blvd, Detroit, 48202, US

Last Update: 13/11/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.michigan.gov/mgcb
760/1000Fair

The Michigan Gaming Control Board provides for the licensing, regulation and control of casino gaming operations at the Detroit commercial casinos. It also licenses and regulates the casinos'​ gaming equipment manufacturers and distributors, suppliers and employees. Add...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:87
Subsidiaries:43
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
State of Oregon

State of Oregon

Salem, 97301, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.oregon.gov/
742/1000Moderate

Official LinkedIn page for the state of Oregon. Oregon is a state in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. It is located on the Pacific coast, with Washington to the north, California to the south, Nevada on the southeast and Idaho to the east. The Columbia...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:10,525
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Michigan Gaming Control Board

Michigan Gaming Control Board

-
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
State of Oregon

State of Oregon

-
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 Michigan Gaming Control Board in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for State of Oregon in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Michigan Gaming Control Board (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Michigan Gaming Control Board cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - State of Oregon (X = Date, Y = Severity)

State of Oregon 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...
Michigan Gaming Control Board

Michigan Gaming Control Board

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
State of Oregon

State of Oregon

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
STA1771960935

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-63261
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). A low-privileged authenticated user can send a specially crafted request to a Kibana machine learning feature, causing the server to exhaust available memory and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
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
CVE-2026-63260
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). An authenticated attacker with low-privilege access can trigger a denial of service condition in Kibana by sending a specially crafted, oversized request payload. Processing this user-supplied input requires resource-intensive memory allocation that can exhaust the available heap memory in the Kibana process, causing it to crash and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
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
CVE-2026-63259
SUMMARY

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) in Kibana can lead to information disclosure via user-supplied identifiers that reference scheduled query result data from Kibana Spaces the requester is not authorized to access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63145
SUMMARY

Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to integrity compromise of Machine Learning audit and notification records via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). A vulnerability exists in Kibana's Machine Learning functionality where a Machine Learning management endpoint performs an insufficient authorization check. The endpoint validates only a coarse privilege level but does not verify that the requesting user has access to the specific Machine Learning job or notification resources provided in the request. As a result, a low-privileged user with Machine Learning access in any Kibana space can manipulate Machine Learning audit and notification records for arbitrary jobs—including jobs in other spaces or belonging to other users—by leveraging Kibana's internally elevated credentials to write to restricted Machine Learning system indices that the user cannot access directly.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63144
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Recursion (CWE-674) in Elasticsearch can lead to denial of service via a specially crafted search request submitted by a low-privileged authenticated user. A user with read-level index access can submit a request that triggers unbounded recursive processing within the Elasticsearch query evaluation component, causing a fatal error that terminates the affected node. In single-node deployments, this results in complete service outage; in multi-node clusters, it causes repeated node restarts and sustained availability degradation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
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