Comparison Overview

ST TAMMANY PARISH

VS

FDA

ST TAMMANY PARISH

1505 N Florida St Covington, LA 70433, US
Last Update: 2025-03-15 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

None

NAICS: 922
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 2-10
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

FDA

10903 New Hampshire Ave, None, Silver Spring, MD, US, 20993
Last Update: 2025-08-25 (UTC)

Strong

Between 800 and 900

The Food and Drug Administration is an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services. The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by ensuring the safety of our nation's food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. FDA also has responsibility for regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors. FDA is responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medical products more effective, safer, and more affordable and by helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medical products and foods to maintain and improve their health. FDA also plays a significant role in the Nation's counterterrorism capability. FDA fulfills this responsibility by ensuring the security of the food supply and by fostering development of medical products to respond to deliberate and naturally emerging public health threats.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 17,599
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/st-tammany-parish.jpeg
ST TAMMANY PARISH
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fda.jpeg
FDA
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
ST TAMMANY PARISH
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
FDA
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ST TAMMANY PARISH in 2025.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FDA in 2025.

Incident History โ€” ST TAMMANY PARISH (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ST TAMMANY PARISH cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” FDA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

FDA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/st-tammany-parish.jpeg
ST TAMMANY PARISH
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fda.jpeg
FDA
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ST TAMMANY PARISH company company demonstrates a stronger AI risk posture compared to FDA company company, reflecting its advanced AI governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, FDA company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to ST TAMMANY PARISH company.

In the current year, FDA company and ST TAMMANY PARISH company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither FDA company nor ST TAMMANY PARISH company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither FDA company nor ST TAMMANY PARISH company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither FDA company nor ST TAMMANY PARISH company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither ST TAMMANY PARISH company nor FDA company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

FDA company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to ST TAMMANY PARISH company.

FDA company employs more people globally than ST TAMMANY PARISH company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

FreshRSS is a free, self-hostable RSS aggregator. Versions 1.26.3 and below do not sanitize certain event handler attributes in feed content, so by finding a page that renders feed entries without CSP, it is possible to execute an XSS payload. The Allow API access authentication setting needs to be enabled by the instance administrator beforehand for the attack to work as it relies on api/query.php. An account takeover is possible by sending a change password request via the XSS payload / setting UserJS for persistence / stealing the autofill password / displaying a phishing page with a spoofed URL using history.replaceState() If the victim is an administrator, the attacker can also perform administrative actions. This issue is fixed in version 1.27.0.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

go-f3 is a Golang implementation of Fast Finality for Filecoin (F3). In versions 0.8.6 and below, go-f3 panics when it validates a "poison" messages causing Filecoin nodes consuming F3 messages to become vulnerable. A "poison" message can can cause integer overflow in the signer index validation, which can cause the whole node to crash. These malicious messages aren't self-propagating since the bug is in the validator. An attacker needs to directly send the message to all targets. This issue is fixed in version 0.8.7.

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

go-f3 is a Golang implementation of Fast Finality for Filecoin (F3). In versions 0.8.8 and below, go-f3's justification verification caching mechanism has a vulnerability where verification results are cached without properly considering the context of the message. An attacker can bypass justification verification by submitting a valid message with a correct justification and then reusing the same cached justification in contexts where it would normally be invalid. This occurs because the cached verification does not properly validate the relationship between the justification and the specific message context it's being used with. This issue is fixed in version 0.8.9.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L
Description

mkdocs-include-markdown-plugin is an Mkdocs Markdown includer plugin. In versions 7.1.7 and below, there is a vulnerability where unvalidated input can collide with substitution placeholders. This issue is fixed in version 7.1.8.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
Description

go-mail is a comprehensive library for sending mails with Go. In versions 0.7.0 and below, due to incorrect handling of the mail.Address values when a sender- or recipient address is passed to the corresponding MAIL FROM or RCPT TO commands of the SMTP client, there is a possibility of wrong address routing or even ESMTP parameter smuggling. For successful exploitation, it is required that the user's code allows for arbitrary mail address input (i. e. through a web form or similar). If only static mail addresses are used (i. e. in a config file) and the mail addresses in use do not consist of quoted local parts, this should not affect users. This issue is fixed in version 0.7.1

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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