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

Comparison Overview

Public Servants Social Security AdministrationPublic Servants Social Security Administration
VS
Westpac GroupWestpac Group
Public Servants Social Security Administration

Public Servants Social Security Administration

Queen Elizabeth St Addis Ababa, Addis Ababa, 1030, US

Last Update: 09/03/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://psssa.gov.et/
669/1000Weak

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:54
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Westpac Group

Westpac Group

275 Kent St, Sydney, 2000, AU

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
779/1000Fair

From rescue helicopters to signing the Equator Principles, from paying super during parental leave to adding 'Touch ID'​ biometric technology to our banking apps and being first on the scene with a helping hand in times of crisis... we have a proud history of stepping u...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:14,754
Subsidiaries:18
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Public Servants Social Security Administration

Public Servants Social Security Administration

-
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
Westpac Group

Westpac Group

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Public Servants Social Security Administration in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Westpac Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Public Servants Social Security Administration (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Public Servants Social Security Administration cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Westpac Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Westpac Group 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...
Public Servants Social Security Administration

Public Servants Social Security Administration

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
PUB1772245525
Westpac Group

Westpac Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA