Comparison Overview
Social Capital Group

Social Capital Group
Calle Tacna 445, Lima, undefined, undefined, PE
Last Update: 07/03/2026
Social Capital Group (SCG) is a leading professional services firm for social management in private and public sector investment projects. We have provided successful services in more than 30 countries. Since 1999 we have helped our clients understand the risks and oppo...

Acosta Group
6600 Corporate Center Pkwy, Jacksonville, 32216, US
Last Update: 10/09/2026
Acosta Group fuses storied expertise, unmatched connectivity and advanced insight to accelerate brand growth – everywhere you sell. Our collective of the most trusted retail, marketing and foodservice agencies is reimagining how people connect with brands at every point...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Social Capital Group







Acosta Group






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Social Capital Group in 2026.
Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Acosta Group in 2026.
Incident History - Social Capital Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Social Capital Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Acosta Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Acosta Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Social Capital Group

Acosta Group
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.