Comparison Overview

Oregon Department of Transportation

VS

CONICET

Oregon Department of Transportation

355 Capitol St. NE, MS 11, Salem, Oregon, US, 97301-3871
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 550 and 599

The Oregon Department of Transportation is an award-winning organization, more than 4,500 employees strong. Together, ​we provide a safe and reliable multimodal transportation system that connects people and helps Oregon's communities and economy thrive. Transportation in Oregon is a multi-billion dollar investment in our people, our environment and our state. Almost every aspect of life is affected one way or another by transportation. With 96,000 square miles of land, we must have a safe, dependable system — and in Oregon, that includes highways, passenger and freight rail, public transit and non-motorized transportation. Over the past several years, Oregonians have opted to invest in the state’s transportation infrastructure. This commitment to a sound transportation system is creating opportunities for engineers, planners, maintenance and construction workers, information systems specialists, accountants, customer service representatives, inspectors, policy analysts and other knowledgeable employees. Consider a career with the Oregon Department of Transportation. Live and work among tall mountains, surrounded by sandy ocean beaches and clear blue lakes, in the grassy valleys or on the high desert, in the big city or in a small country town. Oregon has it all — just waiting for you to discover; waiting for you to make your mark. For job opportunities, visit www.odotjobs.com or email [email protected]. For general questions, call (888) ASK-ODOT.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 1,953
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

CONICET

Godoy Cruz 2290, CABA, C1425FQB, AR
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799

El Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) es el principal organismo dedicado a la promoción de la ciencia y la tecnología en la Argentina. Su actividad se desarrolla en cuatro grandes áreas: • Ciencias agrarias, ingeniería y de materiales • Ciencias biológicas y de la salud • Ciencias exactas y naturales • Ciencias sociales y humanidades En el CONICET, además promovemos y gestionamos la transferencia de tecnologías, servicios y capacidades de Investigación y Desarrollo (I+D) que genera su comunidad científica hacia los sectores socioproductivos, Pymes, Gobiernos, organismos públicos y la sociedad civil. En ese sentido: • Conectamos recursos humanos altamente especializados con empresarios/as para generar oportunidades conjuntas. • Impulsamos la participación con cámaras y asociaciones empresarias, parques tecnológicos e industriales, organismos del Estado, ONG, organizaciones civiles, y redes nacionales e internacionales de vinculación tecnológica. • Facilitamos la transferencia al sector productivo mediante procesos de escalado, pruebas de concepto, entre otros. • Promovemos la creación de Empresas de Base Tecnológica. El CONICET es un ente autárquico del Estado Nacional en jurisdicción del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 13,752
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/oregon-department-of-transportation.jpeg
Oregon Department of Transportation
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/conicet.jpeg
CONICET
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
Oregon Department of Transportation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
CONICET
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Oregon Department of Transportation in 2026.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CONICET in 2026.

Incident History — Oregon Department of Transportation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Oregon Department of Transportation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

CONICET cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/oregon-department-of-transportation.jpeg
Oregon Department of Transportation
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Data exfiltration and ransom
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 06/2023
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/conicet.jpeg
CONICET
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

CONICET company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Oregon Department of Transportation company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Oregon Department of Transportation company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas CONICET company has not reported any.

In the current year, CONICET company and Oregon Department of Transportation company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Oregon Department of Transportation company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while CONICET company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Oregon Department of Transportation company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other CONICET company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither CONICET company nor Oregon Department of Transportation company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation company nor CONICET company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation nor CONICET holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Oregon Department of Transportation company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to CONICET company.

CONICET company employs more people globally than Oregon Department of Transportation company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation nor CONICET holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation nor CONICET holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation nor CONICET holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation nor CONICET holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation nor CONICET holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Oregon Department of Transportation nor CONICET holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N