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

Comparison Overview

HM Government Public AppointmentsHM Government Public Appointments
VS
State of IllinoisState of Illinois
HM Government Public Appointments

HM Government Public Appointments

70, Whitehall, London, SW1A 2AS, GB

Last Update: 25/03/2026

View Profile
756/1000Fair

Every year the Government makes over a thousand public appointments to the boards of public bodies, which collectively spend over £200bn a year. Varying from arts councils to the National Health Service, these boards impact upon the lives of people living across the UK....

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:3
Subsidiaries:69
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
State of Illinois

State of Illinois

US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://illinois.gov
819/1000Good

The government of Illinois, under the Constitution of Illinois, has three branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial. The executive branch is split into several statewide elected offices, with the Governor as chief executive, and has numerous department...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:11,299
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
HM Government Public Appointments

HM Government Public Appointments

-
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
State of Illinois

State of Illinois

-
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 HM Government Public Appointments in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for State of Illinois in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - HM Government Public Appointments (X = Date, Y = Severity)

HM Government Public Appointments cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - State of Illinois (X = Date, Y = Severity)

State of Illinois 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...
HM Government Public Appointments

HM Government Public Appointments

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
State of Illinois

State of Illinois

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
STA1767411522

FAQ

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