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

Comparison Overview

Ruby on Rails - The Rails FoundationRuby on Rails - The Rails Foundation
VS
Freelancer.comFreelancer.com
Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation

Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation

N/A

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://rubyonrails.org
752/1000Fair

The Rails Foundation is a non-profit foundation set up to improve the documentation, education, marketing, and events of the Ruby on Rails framework to the benefit of all new and existing Rails developers, and to ensure a prosperous ecosystem that continues to improve f...

NAICS:513
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:20
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Freelancer.com

Freelancer.com

Level 37, Grosvenor Place, 225 George Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000, Sydney, 2000, AU

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.freelancer.com
763/1000Fair

Thirteen-time Webby award-winning Freelancer is the world’s largest freelancing and crowdsourcing marketplace by total number of users and projects posted. More than 80 million registered users have posted over 25 million projects and contests to date in over 3,000 area...

NAICS:513
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:85,820
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation

Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation

-
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
Freelancer.com

Freelancer.com

-
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 Technology, Information and Internet Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Freelancer.com in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Freelancer.com (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Freelancer.com 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...
Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation

Ruby on Rails - The Rails Foundation

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
RUB300050125
Freelancer.com

Freelancer.com

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8