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

Comparison Overview

PwC Tech EffectPwC Tech Effect
VS
SGSSGS
PwC Tech Effect

PwC Tech Effect

N/A

Last Update: 18/03/2026

View Profile
756/1000Fair

From our deep knowledge on unlocking value with AI, to emerging technology and transformation, PwC is helping clients turn complexity into competitive advantage at scale. We are continuing to raise the bar on quality across all three lines of service—Advisory, Assurance...

NAICS:54
NAICS Definition:Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:56
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
SGS

SGS

Zugerstrasse 57, Baar, Zug, CH, 6340

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.sgs.com
797/1000Fair

SGS is the world’s leading Testing, Inspection and Certification company. We operate a network of over 2,500 laboratories and business facilities across 115 countries, supported by a team of 99,500 dedicated professionals. With over 145 years of service excellence, we c...

NAICS:54
NAICS Definition:Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Employees:75,688
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
PwC Tech Effect

PwC Tech Effect

-
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
SGS

SGS

-
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 Professional Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PwC Tech Effect in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Professional Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SGS in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - PwC Tech Effect (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PwC Tech Effect cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

SGS 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...
PwC Tech Effect

PwC Tech Effect

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
SGS

SGS

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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