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

Comparison Overview

USDA Natural Resources Conservation ServiceUSDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
VS
I WORK FOR SAI WORK FOR SA
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

1400 Independence Ave SW, Washington, 20250, US

Last Update: 19/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/
765/1000Fair

As the USDA’s primary private lands conservation agency, we generate, manage, and share the data, technology, and standards that enable partners and policymakers to make decisions informed by objective, reliable science. And through one-on-one, personalized advice, we...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:1,348
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
I WORK FOR SA

I WORK FOR SA

200, Victoria Square / Tarndanyangga, Adelaide, 5000, AU

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://iworkfor.sa.gov.au
779/1000Fair

The OFFICIAL careers page for the South Australian Government. The South Australian Public Sector is the State's largest workforce. We are an employer of choice that reflects the diverse community we serve. Our people are from a range of backgrounds and vocations, fro...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:19,039
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

-
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
I WORK FOR SA

I WORK FOR SA

-
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 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for I WORK FOR SA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (X = Date, Y = Severity)

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - I WORK FOR SA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

I WORK FOR SA 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...
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
I WORK FOR SA

I WORK FOR SA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
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:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1