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

Comparison Overview

NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITEDNHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED
VS
Randstad USARandstad USA
NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED

NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED

EDWARD HYDE BUILDING 38 CLARENDON ROAD, WATFORD, WD17 1JW, GB

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
769/1000Fair

NHS Professionals provides managed flexible worker services to the NHS. We help Trusts improve patient care and reduce staffing costs by helping Trusts control their expenditure on expensive commercial staffing agencies and providing people who care for people, in the r...

NAICS:5613
NAICS Definition:Employment Services
Employees:35
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Randstad USA

Randstad USA

3625 Cumberland Park, Blvd, Atlanta, GA, US, 30339

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.randstadusa.com/
797/1000Fair

Randstad North America, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Randstad N.V., the world's largest HR services provider. Driven to become the world's most valued 'working life partner', supporting as many people as possible in realizing their true potential throughout thei...

NAICS:5613
NAICS Definition:Employment Services
Employees:10,361
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED

NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED

-
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
Randstad USA

Randstad USA

-
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 NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Staffing and Recruiting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Randstad USA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED (X = Date, Y = Severity)

NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Randstad USA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Randstad USA 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...
NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED

NHS PROFESSIONALS LIMITED

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
NHS137061325
Randstad USA

Randstad USA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA