Comparison Overview

Serco

VS

IBM

Serco

16 Bartley Wood Business Park, Bartley Way, Hook, Hook, Hampshire, GB, RG27 9UY
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

We bring together the right people, the right technology and the right partners to create innovative solutions that make positive impact and address some of the most urgent and complex challenges facing the modern world. With a focus on serving governments globally, Serco’s services span justice, migration, defence, space, customer services, health, and transport. Our core capabilities include service design and advisory, resourcing, complex programme management, systems integration, case management, engineering, and asset & facilities management.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 31,499
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

IBM

International Business Machines Corp., New Orchard Road, Armonk, New York, NY, US, 10504
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 700 and 749

We don’t just imagine the future — we create it. We collaborate with technologists, developers and engineers to turn bold ideas into real-world impact. We partner with iconic brands like Ferrari and global events like the US Open, Wimbledon and The Masters to bring innovation to the world’s biggest stages and greatest fans. We work side-by-side with our clients, communities and even competitors to harness the power of AI, hybrid cloud and quantum computing — all to build a smarter, more efficient world. If you're fueled by curiosity and driven to make a difference, you'll feel right at home. Let’s create smarter business — together.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 332,876
Subsidiaries: 14
12-month incidents
10
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/serco.jpeg
Serco
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/ibm.jpeg
IBM
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
Serco
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
IBM
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Serco in 2025.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

IBM has 1751.85% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Serco cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

IBM cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/serco.jpeg
Serco
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2021
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 05/2020
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Accidental Sharing
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ibm.jpeg
IBM
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Phishing (Email), Vendor Scams, Credential Theft, Image-Based Phishing, Social Engineering
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Serco company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to IBM company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

IBM company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Serco company.

In the current year, IBM company has reported more cyber incidents than Serco company.

Serco company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while IBM company has not reported such incidents publicly.

IBM company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Serco company has not reported such incidents publicly.

IBM company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Serco company has not reported such incidents publicly.

IBM company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Serco company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Serco nor IBM holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

IBM company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Serco company.

IBM company employs more people globally than Serco company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither Serco nor IBM holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Serco nor IBM holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Serco nor IBM holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Serco nor IBM holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Serco nor IBM holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Serco nor IBM holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H