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

Comparison Overview

Polk County BoCCPolk County BoCC
VS
Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of HelsinkiHelsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki
Polk County BoCC

Polk County BoCC

330 West Church Street, Bartow, 33830, US

Last Update: 29/05/2026

View Profile
Between 600 and 649
http://www.polkfl.gov
638/1000Poor

Overview Polk County Government employees more than 2,500 public servants in the areas of support services, human resources, public safety, infrastructure, tourism, sports marketing, planning and development. Polk County Board of County Commissioners As outlined in th...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:887
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki

Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki

Pohjoisesplanadi 11-13, Helsinki, 00170, FI

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.hel.fi
701/1000Moderate

#MeTeemmeHelsingin Helsingin kaupunki on Suomen suurin työnantaja, jonka palveluksessa on lähes 39 000 ammattilaista ja asiantuntijaa. Helsingin kaupunki tarjoaa henkilöstölle monipuolisia, mielenkiintoisia ja yhteiskunnallisesti merkittäviä työtehtäviä, hyvät mahdoll...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:11,109
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Polk County BoCC

Polk County BoCC

-
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
Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki

Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki

-
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)

Polk County BoCC has 30.56% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Polk County BoCC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Polk County BoCC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki 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...
Polk County BoCC

Polk County BoCC

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
POL1780014583
Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki

Helsingin kaupunki – Helsingfors stad – City of Helsinki

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
CIT1767600354

FAQ

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