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

Comparison Overview

Sofi TechnologiesSofi Technologies
VS
HDRHDR
Sofi Technologies

Sofi Technologies

N/A

Last Update: 10/03/2026

View Profile
743/1000Moderate

Website Design & Development in Jammu and Kashmir, logo designing , seo service, eCommerce solutions

NAICS:5414
NAICS Definition:Specialized Design Services
Employees:7
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
HDR

HDR

1917 S 67th St, Omaha, 68106, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.hdrinc.com/
783/1000Fair

HDR is an employee-owned design firm specializing in engineering, architecture, environmental and construction services. We’re ranked No. 6 among the world’s design firms and we’re the largest healthcare design firm. Led by the strength of our values and a culture shap...

NAICS:5414
NAICS Definition:Specialized Design Services
Employees:16,613
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Sofi Technologies

Sofi Technologies

-
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
HDR

HDR

-
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 Design Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Sofi Technologies has 58.33% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Design Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for HDR in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Sofi Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Sofi Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

HDR 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...
Sofi Technologies

Sofi Technologies

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
SOF1770198024
HDR

HDR

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2