Comparison Overview

Rijkswaterstaat

VS

County of Santa Clara

Rijkswaterstaat

Koningskade 4, Den Haag, 2500 EX, NL
Last Update: 2026-01-17

Rijkswaterstaat is de uitvoeringsorganisatie van het Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat. We beheren en ontwikkelen de rijkswegen, -vaarwegen en –wateren en zetten in op een duurzame leefomgeving. Samen met andere organisaties werken we aan een land dat beschermd is tegen overstromingen. Waar voldoende groen is, en voldoende en schoon water. En waar je vlot en veilig van A naar B kunt. Samenwerken aan een veilig, leefbaar en bereikbaar Nederland. Dat is Rijkswaterstaat. Bij Rijkswaterstaat werk je mee aan de toekomst van Nederland met de ruimte om jezelf te blijven ontwikkelen. Gun jezelf een baan met toekomst. Gun jezelf Rijkswaterstaat.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 12,096
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

County of Santa Clara

70 W. Hedding St., San Jose, 95110, US
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799

The County of Santa Clara is located at the southern end of the San Francisco Bay and encompasses 1,312 square miles. It has one of the highest median family incomes in the country, and a wide diversity of cultures, backgrounds and talents. The County of Santa Clara continues to attract people from all over the world. With more than 70 agencies/departments and 22,000 employees, the County of Santa Clara plans for the needs of a dynamic community, provides quality services, and promotes a healthy, safe and prosperous community for all. The County provides essential services including public health protection, environmental protection, medical services through Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (SCVMC), child and adult protection services, homelessness prevention and solutions, roads, park services, libraries, emergency response to disasters, protection of minority communities and those under threat, access to a fair criminal justice system, and scores of other services, particularly for those members of our community in the greatest need. The County's population of nearly 1.9 million is one of the largest in the state, and the largest of the nine Bay Area counties. Its population constitutes about one fourth of the Bay Area's total population. There are 15 cities including Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale ranging from Palo Alto to the north, to Gilroy in the south. San Jose is the largest city in the County, with a population of 1.035 million, and is the administrative site of County Government. A significant portion of the county's land area is unincorporated ranch and farmland. Nearly 92% of the population lives in cities. The County of Santa Clara operates 27 parks covering more than 50,000 acres including scenic lakes, streams, and miles of hiking and biking trails. santaclaracounty.gov/social-media-disclaimer

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 13,214
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rijkswaterstaat.jpeg
Rijkswaterstaat
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/county-of-santa-clara.jpeg
County of Santa Clara
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
Rijkswaterstaat
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
County of Santa Clara
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rijkswaterstaat in 2026.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for County of Santa Clara in 2026.

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

Rijkswaterstaat cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — County of Santa Clara (X = Date, Y = Severity)

County of Santa Clara cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rijkswaterstaat.jpeg
Rijkswaterstaat
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/county-of-santa-clara.jpeg
County of Santa Clara
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2013
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Theft of Laptop
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Rijkswaterstaat company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to County of Santa Clara company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

County of Santa Clara company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Rijkswaterstaat company has not reported any.

In the current year, County of Santa Clara company and Rijkswaterstaat company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither County of Santa Clara company nor Rijkswaterstaat company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

County of Santa Clara company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Rijkswaterstaat company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither County of Santa Clara company nor Rijkswaterstaat company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat company nor County of Santa Clara company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat nor County of Santa Clara holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Rijkswaterstaat company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to County of Santa Clara company.

County of Santa Clara company employs more people globally than Rijkswaterstaat company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat nor County of Santa Clara holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat nor County of Santa Clara holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat nor County of Santa Clara holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat nor County of Santa Clara holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat nor County of Santa Clara holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Rijkswaterstaat nor County of Santa Clara holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

SummaryA command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) has been found to exist in the `wrangler pages deploy` command. The issue occurs because the `--commit-hash` parameter is passed directly to a shell command without proper validation or sanitization, allowing an attacker with control of `--commit-hash` to execute arbitrary commands on the system running Wrangler. Root causeThe commitHash variable, derived from user input via the --commit-hash CLI argument, is interpolated directly into a shell command using template literals (e.g.,  execSync(`git show -s --format=%B ${commitHash}`)). Shell metacharacters are interpreted by the shell, enabling command execution. ImpactThis vulnerability is generally hard to exploit, as it requires --commit-hash to be attacker controlled. The vulnerability primarily affects CI/CD environments where `wrangler pages deploy` is used in automated pipelines and the --commit-hash parameter is populated from external, potentially untrusted sources. An attacker could exploit this to: * Run any shell command. * Exfiltrate environment variables. * Compromise the CI runner to install backdoors or modify build artifacts. Credits Disclosed responsibly by kny4hacker. Mitigation * Wrangler v4 users are requested to upgrade to Wrangler v4.59.1 or higher. * Wrangler v3 users are requested to upgrade to Wrangler v3.114.17 or higher. * Users on Wrangler v2 (EOL) should upgrade to a supported major version.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/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

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.2 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized creation, deletion or modification access to critical data or all Oracle VM VirtualBox accessible data as well as unauthorized access to critical data or complete access to all Oracle VM VirtualBox accessible data and unauthorized ability to cause a partial denial of service (partial DOS) of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.1 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.2 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.2 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H