Comparison Overview

I work for NSW

VS

City of Los Angeles

I work for NSW

undefined, Sydney, NSW, 2000, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-25
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://iworkfor.nsw.gov.au/

The NSW public sector includes ten departments and many agencies and organisations working together to develop policy and deliver important services such as health, education, housing, transport and infrastructure across NSW. We are over 300,000 dedicated people who share the same values - making a difference, giving back and responding to the future. Read our community guidelines: bit.ly/PD-community-guidelines

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 59,726
Subsidiaries: 17
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
4
View Profile

City of Los Angeles

200 North Spring St., Los Angeles, California, US, 90012
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799
https://linkpages.pro/CityLAJobs

The City of Los Angeles employs more than 45,000 people in a wide range of careers. Visit our website for information on current openings, including regular civil service positions, exempt and emergency appointment opportunities, in addition to internships! The City of Los Angeles is a Mayor-Council-Commission form of government, as originally adopted by voters of the City of Los Angeles, effective July 1, 1925, and reaffirmed by a new Charter effective July 1, 2000. A Mayor, City Controller, and City Attorney are elected by City residents every four years. Fifteen City Council members representing fifteen districts are elected by the people for four-year terms, for a maximum of two terms. Members of Commissions are generally appointed by the Mayor, subject to the approval of the City Council. General Managers of the various City departments are also appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City Council. Most employees of the City are subject to the civil service provisions of the City Charter.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 15,569
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nsw-government.jpeg
I work for NSW
—
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/city-of-los-angeles.jpeg
City of Los Angeles
—
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
I work for NSW
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
City of Los Angeles
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for I work for NSW in 2025.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for City of Los Angeles in 2025.

Incident History — I work for NSW (X = Date, Y = Severity)

I work for NSW cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — City of Los Angeles (X = Date, Y = Severity)

City of Los Angeles cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nsw-government.jpeg
I work for NSW
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Accidental Exposure
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 07/2021
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 02/2021
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Exploitation of Vulnerability
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/city-of-los-angeles.jpeg
City of Los Angeles
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

I work for NSW company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to City of Los Angeles company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

I work for NSW company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas City of Los Angeles company has not reported any.

In the current year, City of Los Angeles company and I work for NSW company have not reported any cyber incidents.

I work for NSW company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while City of Los Angeles company has not reported such incidents publicly.

I work for NSW company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other City of Los Angeles company has not reported such incidents publicly.

I work for NSW company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while City of Los Angeles company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither I work for NSW company nor City of Los Angeles company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither I work for NSW nor City of Los Angeles holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

I work for NSW company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to City of Los Angeles company.

I work for NSW company employs more people globally than City of Los Angeles company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither I work for NSW nor City of Los Angeles holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither I work for NSW nor City of Los Angeles holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither I work for NSW nor City of Los Angeles holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither I work for NSW nor City of Los Angeles holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither I work for NSW nor City of Los Angeles holds HIPAA certification.

Neither I work for NSW nor City of Los Angeles holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
References
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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
References
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
References
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References