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

Comparison Overview

NetherlandsNetherlands
VS
County of Santa ClaraCounty of Santa Clara
Netherlands

Netherlands

Prinses Beatrixlaan 2, The Hague, 2595 AL, NL

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.nlplatform.com/
741/1000Moderate

The Netherlands strives to solve societal and economic challenges with local and international partners. Let’s make a difference together! Read more about it on nlplatform.com

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:436
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
County of Santa Clara

County of Santa Clara

70 W. Hedding St., San Jose, 95110, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.sccgov.org
774/1000Fair

The County of Santa Clara is located at the southern end of the San Francisco Bay and encompasses 1,312 square miles. It has one of the highest median family incomes in the country, and a wide diversity of cultures, backgrounds and talents. The County of Santa Clara c...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:13,214
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Netherlands

Netherlands

-
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
County of Santa Clara

County of Santa Clara

-
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 Netherlands in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for County of Santa Clara in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Netherlands (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Netherlands cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - County of Santa Clara (X = Date, Y = Severity)

County of Santa Clara 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...
Netherlands

Netherlands

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
NLN1772353652
County of Santa Clara

County of Santa Clara

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
COU1006080425

FAQ

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