Comparison Overview

ProdigyWorks

VS

Nuffield Trust

ProdigyWorks

156 W 56th St, New York, undefined, 10019, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Innovation is critical in today’s environment. But true innovation is often elusive, expensive or too slow. What if you had exclusive access to the world’s smartest minds, extraordinary creative talent and a global network of industry experts? How would you look if you could deliver meaningful results, not in months, but weeks? The same problems that may keep you up at night are the fuel that ignites our team and our incredibly diverse global network of High-IQ thinkers and creative geniuses. Whether it’s discovering new breakthrough innovation opportunities, building out robust 3-5 year innovation pipelines, or identifying brand new white space opportunities for your brand, ProdigyWorks can help solve your most complex innovation challenges. See why great companies like P&G, HP, Mondelez, Bayer Healthcare, General Mills, Coppertone, Kellogg's and more turn to ProdigyWorks to accelerate their innovation efforts and stay ahead of the competition.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 18
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Nuffield Trust

59 New Cavendish Street, London, undefined, W1G 7LP, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-03

The Nuffield Trust is an independent health charity. We aim to improve the quality of health care in the UK by providing evidence-based research and policy analysis and informing and generating debate. Our vision is to help achieve a high quality health and social care system that improves the health and care of people in the UK. We aim to help provide the evidence base for better health care through four key activities: conducting cutting edge research and influential analysis; informing and generating debate; supporting leaders; and examining international best practice. Find out more by visiting the Nuffield Trust website at: http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk, or by following us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NuffieldTrust. You can also subscribe for our newsletter and regular email updates to be the first to hear about our latest research and analysis, updates on key research projects, video interviews with UK and international health leaders, blogs from our experts, latest events and interactive data visualisations: http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/newsletter.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 61
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/prodigyworks.jpeg
ProdigyWorks
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/nuffield-trust.jpeg
Nuffield Trust
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
ProdigyWorks
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Nuffield Trust
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Think Tanks Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ProdigyWorks in 2025.

Incidents vs Think Tanks Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Nuffield Trust in 2025.

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

ProdigyWorks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Nuffield Trust (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Nuffield Trust cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/prodigyworks.jpeg
ProdigyWorks
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nuffield-trust.jpeg
Nuffield Trust
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both ProdigyWorks company and Nuffield Trust company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Nuffield Trust company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to ProdigyWorks company.

In the current year, Nuffield Trust company and ProdigyWorks company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Nuffield Trust company nor ProdigyWorks company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Nuffield Trust company nor ProdigyWorks company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Nuffield Trust company nor ProdigyWorks company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither ProdigyWorks company nor Nuffield Trust company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither ProdigyWorks nor Nuffield Trust holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither ProdigyWorks company nor Nuffield Trust company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Nuffield Trust company employs more people globally than ProdigyWorks company, reflecting its scale as a Think Tanks.

Neither ProdigyWorks nor Nuffield Trust holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ProdigyWorks nor Nuffield Trust holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ProdigyWorks nor Nuffield Trust holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ProdigyWorks nor Nuffield Trust holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ProdigyWorks nor Nuffield Trust holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ProdigyWorks nor Nuffield Trust holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Sigstore Timestamp Authority is a service for issuing RFC 3161 timestamps. Prior to 2.0.3, Function api.ParseJSONRequest currently splits (via a call to strings.Split) an optionally-provided OID (which is untrusted data) on periods. Similarly, function api.getContentType splits the Content-Type header (which is also untrusted data) on an application string. As a result, in the face of a malicious request with either an excessively long OID in the payload containing many period characters or a malformed Content-Type header, a call to api.ParseJSONRequest or api.getContentType incurs allocations of O(n) bytes (where n stands for the length of the function's argument). This vulnerability is fixed in 2.0.3.

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
Description

Monkeytype is a minimalistic and customizable typing test. In 25.49.0 and earlier, there is improper handling of user input which allows an attacker to execute malicious javascript on anyone viewing a malicious quote submission. quote.text and quote.source are user input, and they're inserted straight into the DOM. If they contain HTML tags, they will be rendered (after some escaping using quotes and textarea tags).

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/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
Description

SysReptor is a fully customizable pentest reporting platform. Prior to 2025.102, there is a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability allows authenticated users to execute malicious JavaScript in the context of other logged-in users by uploading malicious JavaScript files in the web UI. This vulnerability is fixed in 2025.102.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Taiko Alethia is an Ethereum-equivalent, permissionless, based rollup designed to scale Ethereum without compromising its fundamental properties. In 2.3.1 and earlier, TaikoInbox._verifyBatches (packages/protocol/contracts/layer1/based/TaikoInbox.sol:627-678) advanced the local tid to whatever transition matched the current blockHash before knowing whether that batch would actually be verified. When the loop later broke (e.g., cooldown window not yet passed or transition invalidated), the function still wrote that newer tid into batches[lastVerifiedBatchId].verifiedTransitionId after decrementing batchId. Result: the last verified batch could end up pointing at a transition index from the next batch (often zeroed), corrupting the verified chain pointer.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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
Description

A flaw has been found in youlaitech youlai-mall 1.0.0/2.0.0. Affected is the function getById/updateAddress/deleteAddress of the file /mall-ums/app-api/v1/addresses/. Executing manipulation can lead to improper control of dynamically-identified variables. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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