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

Comparison Overview

Georgia Power Economic DevelopmentGeorgia Power Economic Development
VS
COTOCOTO
Georgia Power Economic Development

Georgia Power Economic Development

75 5th St NW, Atlanta, 30308, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.selectgeorgia.com
756/1000Fair

For almost a century, Georgia Power has been helping hometowns across the state grow and prosper. We understand that growing a business or a community is a big job, so to help companies and communities navigate the journey from where they’re at to where they want to be,...

NAICS:522293
NAICS Definition:International Trade Financing
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:19
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
COTO

COTO

Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, AR

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
800/1000Good

¿Sabés lo importante que es para nosotros que formes parte de COTO? Te proponemos superarte con proyectos arquitectónicos increíbles como, por ejemplo, la construcción de un mega centro comercial, o profesionalizarte en Comercio Exterior interactuando con los mercados ...

NAICS:522293
NAICS Definition:International Trade Financing
Employees:18,260
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Georgia Power Economic Development

Georgia Power Economic Development

-
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
COTO

COTO

-
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 International Trade and Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Georgia Power Economic Development in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs International Trade and Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for COTO in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Georgia Power Economic Development (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Georgia Power Economic Development cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

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

COTO 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...
Georgia Power Economic Development

Georgia Power Economic Development

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
COTO

COTO

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-86544
SUMMARY

knowns versions before 0.30.0 contain an authorization bypass vulnerability where mutating code actions are incorrectly classified as read-only operations. Attackers with read-restricted sessions can exploit code.replace to modify permission configurations and escalate privileges on subsequent calls.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-07
UPDATED
Date2026-09-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86543
SUMMARY

knowns versions before 0.30.0 serve the management API without authentication on all network interfaces by default, with no password required on fresh installations. Attackers can access the unauthenticated /api/tunnel/start endpoint to provision a public tunnel and republish the API at a publicly accessible address.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-07
UPDATED
Date2026-09-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-86542
SUMMARY

knowns before 0.30.0 fails to validate import names in the import routes, allowing unauthenticated attackers to write files outside the imports directory. Attackers can supply traversal sequences in the name parameter to escape the imports directory and overwrite arbitrary files writable by the server process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-07
UPDATED
Date2026-09-07
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-86541
SUMMARY

knowns versions before 0.30.0 contain a path traversal vulnerability in the handleCodeReplace() function that allows attackers to overwrite arbitrary files outside the project root. Attackers can supply absolute paths or relative paths containing directory traversal sequences to write malicious content to sensitive files like shell startup scripts or SSH configuration files.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-07
UPDATED
Date2026-09-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:H/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
5.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86540
SUMMARY

knowns versions before 0.30.0 fail to validate the settings.lsp.languages binary field in project configuration files, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary binaries by crafting a malicious .knowns/config.json file. When a repository with a crafted configuration is opened, the unvalidated binary path is executed twice under the user's account without any verification.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-07
UPDATED
Date2026-09-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8