Comparison Overview

Nelnet

VS

Conduent

Nelnet

121 S 13th Street, None, Lincoln, Nebraska, US, 68508
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 750 and 799

Nelnet is a leading student loan servicer – but we’re even more than that. We provide payment technology for over 1,300 higher education institutions and 11,500 K-12 schools. We deliver world-class fiber internet, TV, and phone services to residents of Nebraska and Colorado. We help borrowers achieve their educational goals with private student loan and refinance solutions. And we help businesses boost their performance with our cutting-edge technology and trusted expertise. Each day, over 6,500 Nelnet associates in more than 30 communities across the country work to serve our customers and make their dreams possible. And we’re on the lookout for new people to help us go even further.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 3,116
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Conduent

100 Campus Dr, None, Florham Park, New Jersey, US, 07932
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 0 and 549

Conduent delivers digital business solutions and services spanning the commercial, government and transportation spectrum – creating valuable outcomes for its clients and the millions of people who count on them. We leverage cloud computing, artificial intelligence, machine learning, automation and advanced analytics to deliver mission-critical solutions. Through a dedicated global team of approximately 55,000 associates, process expertise and advanced technologies, our solutions and services digitally transform our clients’ operations to enhance customer experiences, improve performance, increase efficiencies and reduce costs. We drive progress in every process for our client including disbursing approximately $100 billion in government payments annually, enabling 2.3 billion customer service interactions annually, empowering millions of employees through HR services every year and processing nearly 13 million tolling transactions every day. Learn more at www.conduent.com

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 36,834
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
4
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nelnet.jpeg
Nelnet
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/conduent.jpeg
Conduent
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
Nelnet
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Conduent
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Nelnet in 2025.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

Conduent has 433.33% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Nelnet cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Conduent cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nelnet.jpeg
Nelnet
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2022
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: System Vulnerability
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/conduent.jpeg
Conduent
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Espionage (F5 source code theft), Financial gain (Conduent breach), Activism (hacktivist attacks on critical infrastructure)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Theft
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Nelnet company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Conduent company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Conduent company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Nelnet company.

In the current year, Conduent company has reported more cyber incidents than Nelnet company.

Conduent company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Nelnet company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Conduent company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Nelnet company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Conduent company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Nelnet company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Nelnet company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Conduent company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Nelnet nor Conduent holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Nelnet company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Conduent company.

Conduent company employs more people globally than Nelnet company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither Nelnet nor Conduent holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Nelnet nor Conduent holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Nelnet nor Conduent holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Nelnet nor Conduent holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Nelnet nor Conduent holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Nelnet nor Conduent holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

In GnuPG through 2.4.8, if a signed message has \f at the end of a plaintext line, an adversary can construct a modified message that places additional text after the signed material, such that signature verification of the modified message succeeds (although an "invalid armor" message is printed during verification). This is related to use of \f as a marker to denote truncation of a long plaintext line.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N
Description

A vulnerability has been found in jackq XCMS up to 3fab5342cc509945a7ce1b8ec39d19f701b89261. Affected is the function Upload of the file Admin/Home/Controller/ProductImageController.class.php of the component Backend. Such manipulation of the argument File leads to unrestricted upload. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product takes the approach of rolling releases to provide continious delivery. Therefore, version details for affected and updated releases are not available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.8
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 4.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
Description

In PHP versions 8.1.* before 8.1.34, 8.2.* before 8.2.30, 8.3.* before 8.3.29, 8.4.* before 8.4.16, 8.5.* before 8.5.1 when using the PDO PostgreSQL driver with PDO::ATTR_EMULATE_PREPARES enabled, an invalid character sequence (such as \x99) in a prepared statement parameter may cause the quoting function PQescapeStringConn to return NULL, leading to a null pointer dereference in pdo_parse_params() function. This may lead to crashes (segmentation fault) and affect the availability of the target server.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.2
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
Description

In PHP versions:8.1.* before 8.1.34, 8.2.* before 8.2.30, 8.3.* before 8.3.29, 8.4.* before 8.4.16, 8.5.* before 8.5.1, a heap buffer overflow occurs in array_merge() when the total element count of packed arrays exceeds 32-bit limits or HT_MAX_SIZE, due to an integer overflow in the precomputation of element counts using zend_hash_num_elements(). This may lead to memory corruption or crashes and affect the integrity and availability of the target server.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H
Description

In PHP versions:8.1.* before 8.1.34, 8.2.* before 8.2.30, 8.3.* before 8.3.29, 8.4.* before 8.4.16, 8.5.* before 8.5.1, the getimagesize() function may leak uninitialized heap memory into the APPn segments (e.g., APP1) when reading images in multi-chunk mode (such as via php://filter). This occurs due to a bug in php_read_stream_all_chunks() that overwrites the buffer without advancing the pointer, leaving tail bytes uninitialized. This may lead to information disclosure of sensitive heap data and affect the confidentiality of the target server.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:N/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