Comparison Overview

Social Planning Toronto

VS

Independent Women's Forum

Social Planning Toronto

2 Carlton St., Toronto, ON, M5B 1J3, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-27
View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.socialplanningtoronto.org

Mission: Social Planning Toronto challenges inequity in our city through knowledge generation, debate, civic engagement, advocacy, and collaboration to spark social and policy change. Values: We are committed to equity, diversity, inclusion, and anti-racism We respect the rights, knowledge, protocols, and traditions of Indigenous peoples We are independent and non-partisan We are stronger through our work with partners We are accountable to the community We ground our work in the lived experiences and expertise of local communities We are persistent and proactive, recognizing change is often a long process We value evidence-based decision making

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 23
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Independent Women's Forum

1875 I Street NW | Suite 500, Washington, DC, 20006, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749
https://www.iwf.org/

Independent Women's Forum is dedicated to developing and advancing policies that aren’t just well-intended, but actually enhance people’s freedom, choices, and opportunities. We work every day to engage and inform women and create a community to discuss how policy issues – including paid leave, health care, taxes, energy, minimum wage, and education – impact them and their loved ones. To keep informed of IWF media appearances, publications, and events, please sign up here: https://www.iwf.org/connect/

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 81
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/independent-women's-forum.jpeg
Independent Women's Forum
—
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
Social Planning Toronto
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Independent Women's Forum
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Social Planning Toronto in 2025.

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Independent Women's Forum in 2025.

Incident History — Social Planning Toronto (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Social Planning Toronto cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Independent Women's Forum (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Independent Women's Forum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/social-planning-toronto.jpeg
Social Planning Toronto
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/independent-women's-forum.jpeg
Independent Women's Forum
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Independent Women's Forum company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Social Planning Toronto company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Independent Women's Forum company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Social Planning Toronto company.

In the current year, Independent Women's Forum company and Social Planning Toronto company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Independent Women's Forum company nor Social Planning Toronto company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Independent Women's Forum company nor Social Planning Toronto company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Independent Women's Forum company nor Social Planning Toronto company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Social Planning Toronto company nor Independent Women's Forum company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Social Planning Toronto nor Independent Women's Forum holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Social Planning Toronto company nor Independent Women's Forum company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Independent Women's Forum company employs more people globally than Social Planning Toronto company, reflecting its scale as a Public Policy Offices.

Neither Social Planning Toronto nor Independent Women's Forum holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Social Planning Toronto nor Independent Women's Forum holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Social Planning Toronto nor Independent Women's Forum holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Social Planning Toronto nor Independent Women's Forum holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Social Planning Toronto nor Independent Women's Forum holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Social Planning Toronto nor Independent Women's Forum holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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
References
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
References
Description

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
References
Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.

Published
Date
2025-11-27
Updated
Date
2025-11-27
References