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

Comparison Overview

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
VS
CONICETCONICET
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

1200 New Jersey Avenue S.E., Washington, D.C., 20590, US

Last Update: 28/01/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov
761/1000Fair

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s mission is to protect people and the environment by advancing the safe transportation of energy and other hazardous materials that are essential to our daily lives. About us: • From ensuring that freight tra...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:306
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
CONICET

CONICET

Godoy Cruz 2290, CABA, C1425FQB, AR

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.conicet.gov.ar
782/1000Fair

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 •...

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

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

-
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
CONICET

CONICET

-
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 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CONICET in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

CONICET 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...
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
CONICET

CONICET

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2