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

Comparison Overview

Silcock Leedham Group LimitedSilcock Leedham Group Limited
VS
Tata ProjectsTata Projects
Silcock Leedham Group Limited

Silcock Leedham Group Limited

Upperbank House, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS184BN, GB

Last Update: 01/11/2025

View Profile
750/1000Fair

Silcock Leedham are Mechanical & Electrical Building Services Consulting Engineers, with broad based expertise in all construction sectors including offices, laboratories, education, public buildings specialist services and industrial warehousing both in the UK and over...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:43
Subsidiaries:124
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Tata Projects

Tata Projects

14th - 15th Floor, Cignus, Mumbai, 400087, IN

Last Update: 14/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.tataprojects.com
809/1000Good

Tata Projects is one of the most admired Technology led Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) companies in India. We have expertise in providing sustainable solutions in the execution of large and complex urban and industrial infrastructure projects while also...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:19,605
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Silcock Leedham Group Limited

Silcock Leedham Group Limited

-
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
Tata Projects

Tata Projects

-
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 Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Silcock Leedham Group Limited in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tata Projects in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Silcock Leedham Group Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Silcock Leedham Group Limited cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Tata Projects (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tata Projects 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...
Silcock Leedham Group Limited

Silcock Leedham Group Limited

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Tata Projects

Tata Projects

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-91201
SUMMARY

DocsGPT through 0.20.0 posts OAuth connector session tokens to a wildcard target origin in the callback-status endpoint without validating sender origin. Attackers can obtain session tokens and provider account emails by acting as window.opener during OAuth authorization, then use tokens to disconnect victims' cloud storage connectors.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/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
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-91200
SUMMARY

DevSpace through 6.3.21 fails to reject parent-directory segments in tar entry names from the in-pod sync stream. Attackers operating a malicious container can stream tar entries with traversal sequences to write arbitrary files on the developer workstation, enabling code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
2.8
CVE-2026-91199
SUMMARY

Refly through 1.1.0 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in the POST /v1/misc/scrape endpoint that fetches caller-supplied URLs without validating the scheme, host, or resolved address. Authenticated attackers can make the backend issue requests to loopback, private, and link-local addresses including cloud metadata services to read page titles and descriptions of internal resources.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/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
3.1
CVE-2026-91198
SUMMARY

GrowthBook through 5.0.1 returns unredacted fact table definitions including raw warehouse SQL in payloads served by unauthenticated public report and experiment endpoints. Attackers with knowledge of a publicly shared report or experiment identifier can read internal data warehouse query text, schema, table names, filter values and datasource identifiers.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
3.9
CVE-2026-91197
SUMMARY

Flowable flowable-engine through 8.0.0 contains an XML external entity injection vulnerability in ProcessDiagramLayoutFactory.parseXml() that fails to disable external entity resolution when parsing deployed BPMN resources. Attackers with process deployment privileges can embed DOCTYPE declarations with external entities in BPMN files to read arbitrary local files or trigger requests to internal network endpoints when diagram layout is computed.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8