Sussex Police
Company Details
Linkedin ID:
sussex-police
Website:
Employees number:
2,004
Number of followers:
13,223
NAICS:
92212
Industry Type:
Homepage:
police.uk
IP Addresses:
0
Company ID:
SUS_9752131
Scan Status:
In-progress
Sussex Police Company CyberSecurity Posture
police.uk
We do more than you might expect. We prevent crime, lead successful operations and complex investigations, make arrests, and go the extra mile to keep our local communities safe. From patrolling neighbourhoods and responding to emergencies to conducting criminal investigations and community policing, we have specialist teams, roles, and skillsets dedicated to ensuring the safety and security of the people we serve. We do what it takes to protect our major cities, seaports, coastlines, rural villages, and international airport. As you can see, we have a lot of ground to cover, but this means plenty of scope for satisfying careers, professional development, progression and endless opportunities to improve our county. We’re proud of our purpose and we’re deeply committed to protecting our communities, catching criminals and delivering an outstanding service. We are Sussex Police, are you?
Sussex Police A.I CyberSecurity Scoring
Sussex Police Risk Score (AI oriented)Between 650 and 699
Sussex Police
Updated:
- Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
- Insurance preferes TPRM score to calculate premium
Sussex Police Global Score (TPRM)XXXX
Sussex Police
- Instant access to detailed risk factors
- Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
- Vulnerabilities
- Findings
Sussex Police Company CyberSecurity News & History
Past Incidents
2
Attack Types
1
Sussex Police
Breach
Rankiteo Explanation
Attack with significant impact with internal employee data leaks
Description: Sussex Police experienced a GDPR breach involving the misdelivery of annual pension benefit statements to outdated addresses of pension scheme members. The exposed data included sensitive personal information such as salaries, dates of birth, and accrued pension entitlements. While there was no evidence that the misdelivered statements were opened or that the data was misused, affected members filed a collective action lawsuit under UK GDPR, citing psychiatric injury and fear of third-party misuse. Each claimant sought £1,250 in compensation. The UK Court of Appeal ruled that emotional distress and fear of misuse even without concrete harm could constitute non-material damage under GDPR, lowering the threshold for future mass claims. The breach was self-reported by Sussex Police to the UK Information Commissioner, and notifications were sent to affected individuals, which triggered the class action. The case highlights the rising risk of private litigation for GDPR non-compliance, even in low-risk scenarios.
UK Police: Misconduct charges dropped against RGP inspector and former PC - guilty pleas to data breach
Breach
Rankiteo Explanation
Attack with significant impact with customers data leaks
Description: Former Police Officers Admit to Unauthorized Data Access and Sharing in UK Court Case Two former police officers, Sean Picton and Anthony Bolaños, pleaded guilty to charges of unlawfully obtaining and sharing personal data without consent between October 2022 and January 2023. The case, heard at the UK Supreme Court, centered on Picton’s unauthorized access to sensitive information, which he then shared with Bolaños, who subsequently disclosed it to a third party. Originally, Picton had denied more severe charges, including misconduct in public office and unauthorized computer access, while Bolaños faced allegations of aiding and abetting misconduct. However, both admitted to the reduced charges of data protection violations. Judge Matthew Happold acknowledged that the original charges carried a potential life sentence, whereas the data offenses typically result in fines. He noted that while a conviction for the more serious offenses was plausible, the prosecution had opted for the lesser charges after careful consideration. The case underscores concerns over unauthorized data handling within law enforcement, highlighting the legal consequences of mishandling sensitive information.
Sussex Police Company Scoring based on AI Models
Cyber Incidents Likelihood 3 - 6 - 9 months
A.I Risk Score Likelihood 3 - 6 - 9 months
Underwriter Stats for Sussex Police
Incidents vs Law Enforcement Industry Average (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Sussex Police in 2026.
Incidents vs All-Companies Average (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Sussex Police in 2026.
Incident Types Sussex Police vs Law Enforcement Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Sussex Police in 2026.
Incident History — Sussex Police (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Sussex Police cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Sussex Police Company Subsidiaries
We do more than you might expect. We prevent crime, lead successful operations and complex investigations, make arrests, and go the extra mile to keep our local communities safe. From patrolling neighbourhoods and responding to emergencies to conducting criminal investigations and community policing, we have specialist teams, roles, and skillsets dedicated to ensuring the safety and security of the people we serve. We do what it takes to protect our major cities, seaports, coastlines, rural villages, and international airport. As you can see, we have a lot of ground to cover, but this means plenty of scope for satisfying careers, professional development, progression and endless opportunities to improve our county. We’re proud of our purpose and we’re deeply committed to protecting our communities, catching criminals and delivering an outstanding service. We are Sussex Police, are you?
Loading...
Sussex Police Similar Companies
New York City Police Department
Welcome to the Official NYPD LinkedIn Page. For emergencies, dial 911. To submit crime tips & information, visit www.NYPDcrimestoppers.com or call 800-577-TIPS. The mission of the New York City Police Department is to enhance the quality of life in New York City by working in partnership with the c
Politie Nederland
Politiemensen staan midden in de maatschappij, dicht op het nieuws. De politie is daar waar het gebeurt. Het optreden van agenten ligt altijd onder een vergrootglas. Bij de politie ben je 24 uur per dag en voor iedereen in onze diverse samenleving. Integer, moedig, betrouwbaar en verbindend zijn daa
Swedish Police Authority
Vi gör hela Sverige tryggt och säkert! Att arbeta inom polisen är ett av de finaste uppdrag man kan ha. Du bidrar till samhället genom att göra hela Sverige tryggt och säkert. Oavsett om du jobbar i en civil roll eller som polis, är möjligheterna att växa med en större uppgift många. Vi är Sverig
Government of India
he Government of India, officially known as the Union Government, and also known as the Central Government, was established by the Constitution of India, and is the governing authority of a union of 28 states and seven union territories, collectively called the Republic of India. It is seated in New
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
This is the official Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) LinkedIn account and is used to build awareness of workplace culture, engagement opportunities, and the FBI mission. The FBI does not collect comments or messages through this account. The FBI is the premier law enforcement agency in the
SAPS
Policing in South Africa. I am attached to the newly formed Directorate for Priority Crime Investigations. Formally I was attached to the Detecitve Service and have been conduction investigations for over 25 years. I have also been attached to the National Inspectorate Division of the SAPS for soem
Metropolitan Police
The Metropolitan Police Service is famed around the world and has a unique place in the history of policing. Our headquarters at New Scotland Yard - and its iconic revolving sign - has provided the backdrop to some of the most high profile and complex law enforcement investigations the world has e
GENDARMERIA NACIONAL ARGENTINA
Gendarmería Nacional Argentina (GNA) es una Fuerza de Seguridad de naturaleza militar, que cumple funciones en la seguridad interior, defensa nacional, auxilio a la Justicia Federal y apoyo a la Política Exterior de la RA. Es una de las cuatro Fuerzas que integran el Ministerio de Seguridad de l
.png)
Sussex Police CyberSecurity News
January 07, 2026 08:00 AM
Smart glasses: 'I was secretly filmed and trolled online'
Footage of Oonagh was posted on social media where it attracted hundreds of sexual and derogatory comments.
December 23, 2025 08:00 AM
Man charged following threats and intimidating behaviour in central Brighton
Charges have been authorised after a man was reportedly displaying intimidating and aggressive behaviour towards members of the public in...
December 19, 2025 08:00 AM
Sussex County warns of scam
Sussex County has learned of a scam in which people who have applied for variances or other approvals are getting fraudulent bills,...
December 08, 2025 08:00 AM
Multiple containers carrying perishable goods fall overboard in the Solent
Emergency services are responding after shipping containers from the cargo vessel Baltic Klipper were lost overboard in the Solent, UK.
December 04, 2025 08:00 AM
Seaford man hit, killed by car on Sussex Highway on Dec. 2 identified
Delaware State Police have identified Bret Jewell of Seaford as the man who was hit and killed in a pedestrian crash in Seaford on Dec. 2.
December 02, 2025 08:00 AM
CSO 30 Awards 2025: Celebrating Excellence, Innovation and Leadership in Cybersecurity
The CSO 30 Awards returned this year with an inspiring celebration of the leaders, innovators, and rising stars shaping the future of...
November 05, 2025 08:00 AM
The scope of advocates’ immunity: CC of Sussex Police and the CPS v XGY
By Kian Leong Tan. INTRODUCTION. Do advocates retain an absolute immunity for things and said and done in court, or must the invocation of...
November 03, 2025 08:00 AM
What Recent EU and UK Decisions Tell Us About GDPR Lawsuits | Insights
Companies should take into account recent EU and UK court rulings in private GDPR lawsuits when reviewing their procedures for responding to...
October 06, 2025 07:00 AM
UK mosque set ablaze with two people inside, police investigating suspected hate crime
A UK mosque was set ablaze with two people still inside in a suspected arson attack that police are treating as a hate crime.
Frequently Asked Questions
Explore insights on cybersecurity incidents, risk posture, and Rankiteo's assessments.
Sussex Police CyberSecurity History Information
Official Website of Sussex Police
The official website of Sussex Police is https://www.sussex.police.uk.
Sussex Police’s AI-Generated Cybersecurity Score
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police’s AI-generated cybersecurity score is 665, reflecting their Weak security posture.
How many security badges does Sussex Police’ have ?
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police currently holds 0 security badges, indicating that no recognized compliance certifications are currently verified for the organization.
Has Sussex Police been affected by any supply chain cyber incidents ?
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police has not been affected by any supply chain cyber incidents, and no incident IDs are currently listed for the organization.
Does Sussex Police have SOC 2 Type 1 certification ?
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police is not certified under SOC 2 Type 1.
Does Sussex Police have SOC 2 Type 2 certification ?
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police does not hold a SOC 2 Type 2 certification.
Does Sussex Police comply with GDPR ?
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police is not listed as GDPR compliant.
Does Sussex Police have PCI DSS certification ?
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police does not currently maintain PCI DSS compliance.
Does Sussex Police comply with HIPAA ?
According to Rankiteo, Sussex Police is not compliant with HIPAA regulations.
Does Sussex Police have ISO 27001 certification ?
According to Rankiteo,Sussex Police is not certified under ISO 27001, indicating the absence of a formally recognized information security management framework.
Industry Classification of Sussex Police
Sussex Police operates primarily in the Law Enforcement industry.
Number of Employees at Sussex Police
Sussex Police employs approximately 2,004 people worldwide.
Subsidiaries Owned by Sussex Police
Sussex Police presently has no subsidiaries across any sectors.
Sussex Police’s LinkedIn Followers
Sussex Police’s official LinkedIn profile has approximately 13,223 followers.
NAICS Classification of Sussex Police
Sussex Police is classified under the NAICS code 92212, which corresponds to Police Protection.
Sussex Police’s Presence on Crunchbase
No, Sussex Police does not have a profile on Crunchbase.
Sussex Police’s Presence on LinkedIn
Yes, Sussex Police maintains an official LinkedIn profile, which is actively utilized for branding and talent engagement, which can be accessed here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/sussex-police.
Cybersecurity Incidents Involving Sussex Police
As of January 24, 2026, Rankiteo reports that Sussex Police has experienced 2 cybersecurity incidents.
Number of Peer and Competitor Companies
Sussex Police has an estimated 1,534 peer or competitor companies worldwide.
What types of cybersecurity incidents have occurred at Sussex Police ?
Incident Types: The types of cybersecurity incidents that have occurred include Breach.
How does Sussex Police detect and respond to cybersecurity incidents ?
Detection and Response: The company detects and responds to cybersecurity incidents through an incident response plan activated with data breach notification to affected individuals (sussex police), incident response plan activated with notification to uk information commissioner, and communication strategy with transparency (sussex police), communication strategy with legal defense preparation..
Incident Details
Can you provide details on each incident ?
Title: GDPR Data Breach Claims: Farley v Paymaster (UK) and Quirinbank (EU)
Description: Two recent legal cases—Farley v Paymaster (UK) and Quirinbank (EU)—highlight the increasing risk of private GDPR lawsuits for data breaches. The UK Court of Appeal ruled that emotional distress (e.g., fear of misuse) from a GDPR breach can constitute non-material damage, even without evidence of actual harm. The EU Court of Justice (ECJ) similarly affirmed that 'mere negative feelings' like humiliation or annoyance may qualify for compensation. These rulings, combined with the EU’s Representative Actions Directive, signal a rise in class-action-style litigation for GDPR violations. Companies are advised to revisit breach response plans to mitigate litigation risks, particularly when issuing notifications to affected individuals. **Farley v Paymaster (UK):** Sussex Police sent pension benefit statements (containing salaries, DOBs, and pension entitlements) to outdated addresses. Despite no evidence of misuse, claimants sought £1,250 each for 'psychiatric injury' and 'fear of third-party misuse.' The court ruled that non-material damage claims do not require a minimum severity threshold but must demonstrate a causal link to the breach. **Quirinbank (EU):** A job applicant’s salary rejection letter was mistakenly sent to a third party. The ECJ ruled that 'humiliation' and 'disadvantage in recruitment' could warrant compensation, and injunctions (to prevent future breaches) are separate from damages. The GDPR does not preclude member states from allowing injunctions under national law.
Date Publicly Disclosed: 2025-08-22
Type: Data Breach
Vulnerability Exploited: Human Error (Incorrect Address Usage)Improper Data Handling
Title: Former Police Officers Admit to Unauthorized Data Access and Sharing
Description: Two former police officers, Sean Picton and Anthony Bolaños, pleaded guilty to charges of unlawfully obtaining and sharing personal data without consent between October 2022 and January 2023. Picton accessed sensitive information without authorization and shared it with Bolaños, who then disclosed it to a third party.
Type: Unauthorized Data Access
Attack Vector: Insider Threat
Vulnerability Exploited: Lack of access controls and monitoring
Threat Actor: Sean PictonAnthony Bolaños
Motivation: Unauthorized sharing of sensitive information
What are the most common types of attacks the company has faced ?
Common Attack Types: The most common types of attacks the company has faced is Breach.
Impact of the Incidents
What was the impact of each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Data Compromised: Salaries, Dates of birth, Pension entitlements, Job applicant salary expectations
Customer Complaints: ['Class Action Lawsuits (UK)', 'Individual Claims (EU)']
Brand Reputation Impact: Potential erosion of trust due to litigation publicityIncreased scrutiny of GDPR compliance practices
Legal Liabilities: Private GDPR Lawsuits (UK/EU)Potential Class Actions under EU Representative Actions DirectiveInjunctions for Future Data Processing
Identity Theft Risk: ['Low (no evidence of misuse in Farley case)', 'Potential (Quirinbank case)']
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Data Compromised: Personal and sensitive information
Brand Reputation Impact: Negative impact on law enforcement trust
Legal Liabilities: Fines and legal consequences
Identity Theft Risk: High
What types of data are most commonly compromised in incidents ?
Commonly Compromised Data Types: The types of data most commonly compromised in incidents are Personal Identifiable Information (Pii), Financial Information (Salaries/Pensions), Employment Data, and Personal and sensitive information.
Which entities were affected by each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Entity Name: Sussex Police (Pension Scheme)
Entity Type: Government Agency
Industry: Public Sector
Location: United Kingdom
Customers Affected: Pension scheme members (number unspecified)
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Entity Name: Unnamed Company (Quirinbank Case)
Entity Type: Private Company
Location: Germany
Customers Affected: 1 (job applicant)
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Entity Name: UK Law Enforcement
Entity Type: Government
Industry: Public Sector
Location: United Kingdom
Response to the Incidents
What measures were taken in response to each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Incident Response Plan Activated: ['Data Breach Notification to Affected Individuals (Sussex Police)', 'Notification to UK Information Commissioner']
Communication Strategy: Transparency (Sussex Police)Legal Defense Preparation
What is the company's incident response plan?
Incident Response Plan: The company's incident response plan is described as Data Breach Notification to Affected Individuals (Sussex Police), Notification to UK Information Commissioner, .
Data Breach Information
What type of data was compromised in each breach ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Type of Data Compromised: Personal identifiable information (pii), Financial information (salaries/pensions), Employment data
Sensitivity of Data: High
Data Exfiltration: No (Farley case: misdelivered physical mail; Quirinbank case: email to unintended recipient)
File Types Exposed: Physical Mail (Farley)Email (Quirinbank)
Personally Identifiable Information: NamesDates of BirthSalariesPension DetailsJob Application Data
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Type of Data Compromised: Personal and sensitive information
Sensitivity of Data: High
Data Exfiltration: Yes
Personally Identifiable Information: Yes
Regulatory Compliance
Were there any regulatory violations and fines imposed for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Regulations Violated: UK GDPR (Article 82: Right to Compensation), EU GDPR (Article 82: Right to Compensation), EU Representative Actions Directive (Class Action Risk),
Legal Actions: Farley v Paymaster [2025] EWCA Civ 1117 (UK Court of Appeal), Quirinbank (Case C-665/23, EU:C:2025:655, ECJ),
Regulatory Notifications: UK Information Commissioner (Sussex Police)
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Regulations Violated: Data Protection Laws
Legal Actions: Guilty plea to data protection violations
How does the company ensure compliance with regulatory requirements ?
Ensuring Regulatory Compliance: The company ensures compliance with regulatory requirements through Farley v Paymaster [2025] EWCA Civ 1117 (UK Court of Appeal), Quirinbank (Case C-665/23, EU:C:2025:655, ECJ), , Guilty plea to data protection violations.
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
What lessons were learned from each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Lessons Learned: GDPR breach notifications can trigger private lawsuits even in low-risk cases; weigh transparency against litigation risks., Non-material damages (e.g., emotional distress) are increasingly actionable under GDPR, lowering the bar for claims., Class-action-style litigation is emerging in the EU via the Representative Actions Directive., Companies must align breach response strategies with potential litigation defenses, including documentation and communications., Monitor EU case law for GDPR interpretations, as UK courts may follow ECJ rulings despite post-Brexit divergence.
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Lessons Learned: Importance of access controls and monitoring in law enforcement to prevent unauthorized data access and sharing.
What recommendations were made to prevent future incidents ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Recommendations: Revisit data breach response plans to assess litigation risks before notifying affected individuals., Train staff on proper data handling (e.g., address verification) to prevent human-error breaches., Document breach responses meticulously to support legal defenses in potential lawsuits., Consider the threshold for issuing GDPR notifications, balancing transparency with litigation exposure., Prepare for class-action risks under the EU Representative Actions Directive, especially for large-scale breaches., Evaluate insurance coverage for GDPR-related litigation and non-material damages.Revisit data breach response plans to assess litigation risks before notifying affected individuals., Train staff on proper data handling (e.g., address verification) to prevent human-error breaches., Document breach responses meticulously to support legal defenses in potential lawsuits., Consider the threshold for issuing GDPR notifications, balancing transparency with litigation exposure., Prepare for class-action risks under the EU Representative Actions Directive, especially for large-scale breaches., Evaluate insurance coverage for GDPR-related litigation and non-material damages.Revisit data breach response plans to assess litigation risks before notifying affected individuals., Train staff on proper data handling (e.g., address verification) to prevent human-error breaches., Document breach responses meticulously to support legal defenses in potential lawsuits., Consider the threshold for issuing GDPR notifications, balancing transparency with litigation exposure., Prepare for class-action risks under the EU Representative Actions Directive, especially for large-scale breaches., Evaluate insurance coverage for GDPR-related litigation and non-material damages.Revisit data breach response plans to assess litigation risks before notifying affected individuals., Train staff on proper data handling (e.g., address verification) to prevent human-error breaches., Document breach responses meticulously to support legal defenses in potential lawsuits., Consider the threshold for issuing GDPR notifications, balancing transparency with litigation exposure., Prepare for class-action risks under the EU Representative Actions Directive, especially for large-scale breaches., Evaluate insurance coverage for GDPR-related litigation and non-material damages.Revisit data breach response plans to assess litigation risks before notifying affected individuals., Train staff on proper data handling (e.g., address verification) to prevent human-error breaches., Document breach responses meticulously to support legal defenses in potential lawsuits., Consider the threshold for issuing GDPR notifications, balancing transparency with litigation exposure., Prepare for class-action risks under the EU Representative Actions Directive, especially for large-scale breaches., Evaluate insurance coverage for GDPR-related litigation and non-material damages.Revisit data breach response plans to assess litigation risks before notifying affected individuals., Train staff on proper data handling (e.g., address verification) to prevent human-error breaches., Document breach responses meticulously to support legal defenses in potential lawsuits., Consider the threshold for issuing GDPR notifications, balancing transparency with litigation exposure., Prepare for class-action risks under the EU Representative Actions Directive, especially for large-scale breaches., Evaluate insurance coverage for GDPR-related litigation and non-material damages.
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Recommendations: Implement stricter access controls, regular audits, and enhanced monitoring of sensitive data access within law enforcement agencies.
What are the key lessons learned from past incidents ?
Key Lessons Learned: The key lessons learned from past incidents are GDPR breach notifications can trigger private lawsuits even in low-risk cases; weigh transparency against litigation risks.,Non-material damages (e.g., emotional distress) are increasingly actionable under GDPR, lowering the bar for claims.,Class-action-style litigation is emerging in the EU via the Representative Actions Directive.,Companies must align breach response strategies with potential litigation defenses, including documentation and communications.,Monitor EU case law for GDPR interpretations, as UK courts may follow ECJ rulings despite post-Brexit divergence.Importance of access controls and monitoring in law enforcement to prevent unauthorized data access and sharing.
What recommendations has the company implemented to improve cybersecurity ?
Implemented Recommendations: The company has implemented the following recommendations to improve cybersecurity: Implement stricter access controls, regular audits and and enhanced monitoring of sensitive data access within law enforcement agencies..
References
Where can I find more information about each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Source: UK Court of Appeal Judgment: Farley v Paymaster
Date Accessed: 2025-08-22
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Source: European Court of Justice Judgment: Quirinbank (Case C-665/23)
Date Accessed: 2025-06-05
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Source: EU Representative Actions Directive
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Source: UK Supreme Court Case
Where can stakeholders find additional resources on cybersecurity best practices ?
Additional Resources: Stakeholders can find additional resources on cybersecurity best practices at and Source: UK Court of Appeal Judgment: Farley v PaymasterDate Accessed: 2025-08-22, and Source: European Court of Justice Judgment: Quirinbank (Case C-665/23)Date Accessed: 2025-06-05, and Source: EU Representative Actions Directive, and Source: UK Supreme Court Case.
Investigation Status
What is the current status of the investigation for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Investigation Status: Closed (Legal Rulings Issued)
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Investigation Status: Concluded
How does the company communicate the status of incident investigations to stakeholders ?
Communication of Investigation Status: The company communicates the status of incident investigations to stakeholders through Transparency (Sussex Police) and Legal Defense Preparation.
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
Were there any advisories issued to stakeholders or customers for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Stakeholder Advisories: Companies Should Anticipate Higher Gdpr Litigation Risks And Adjust Compliance Strategies Accordingly., Legal Teams Should Collaborate With Data Protection Officers To Align Breach Responses With Litigation Defenses..
Customer Advisories: Affected individuals in the UK/EU may now have broader grounds to claim compensation for GDPR breaches, even without proven harm.Monitor communications from organizations involved in data breaches for potential legal recourse.
What advisories does the company provide to stakeholders and customers following an incident ?
Advisories Provided: The company provides the following advisories to stakeholders and customers following an incident: were Companies Should Anticipate Higher Gdpr Litigation Risks And Adjust Compliance Strategies Accordingly., Legal Teams Should Collaborate With Data Protection Officers To Align Breach Responses With Litigation Defenses., Affected Individuals In The Uk/Eu May Now Have Broader Grounds To Claim Compensation For Gdpr Breaches, Even Without Proven Harm., Monitor Communications From Organizations Involved In Data Breaches For Potential Legal Recourse. and .
Post-Incident Analysis
What were the root causes and corrective actions taken for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach SUS3003230110425
Root Causes: Human Error (Incorrect Mailing Addresses In Farley Case), Improper Recipient Selection (Quirinbank Case), Lack Of Verification Processes For Sensitive Data Dissemination,
Corrective Actions: Implement Address Verification Protocols For Physical Mail Containing Pii., Enhance Email Recipient Validation For Sensitive Communications., Conduct Gdpr Litigation Risk Assessments As Part Of Breach Response Planning.,
Incident : Unauthorized Data Access SUS1769125781
Root Causes: Lack of access controls and monitoring, insider threat
What corrective actions has the company taken based on post-incident analysis ?
Corrective Actions Taken: The company has taken the following corrective actions based on post-incident analysis: Implement Address Verification Protocols For Physical Mail Containing Pii., Enhance Email Recipient Validation For Sensitive Communications., Conduct Gdpr Litigation Risk Assessments As Part Of Breach Response Planning., .
Additional Questions
General Information
Who was the attacking group in the last incident ?
Last Attacking Group: The attacking group in the last incident was an Sean PictonAnthony Bolaños.
Incident Details
What was the most recent incident publicly disclosed ?
Most Recent Incident Publicly Disclosed: The most recent incident publicly disclosed was on 2025-08-22.
Impact of the Incidents
What was the most significant data compromised in an incident ?
Most Significant Data Compromised: The most significant data compromised in an incident were Salaries, Dates of Birth, Pension Entitlements, Job Applicant Salary Expectations, and Personal and sensitive information.
Data Breach Information
What was the most sensitive data compromised in a breach ?
Most Sensitive Data Compromised: The most sensitive data compromised in a breach were Personal and sensitive information, Job Applicant Salary Expectations, Pension Entitlements, Salaries and Dates of Birth.
Regulatory Compliance
What was the most significant legal action taken for a regulatory violation ?
Most Significant Legal Action: The most significant legal action taken for a regulatory violation was Farley v Paymaster [2025] EWCA Civ 1117 (UK Court of Appeal), Quirinbank (Case C-665/23, EU:C:2025:655, ECJ), , Guilty plea to data protection violations.
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
What was the most significant lesson learned from past incidents ?
Most Significant Lesson Learned: The most significant lesson learned from past incidents was Monitor EU case law for GDPR interpretations, as UK courts may follow ECJ rulings despite post-Brexit divergence., Importance of access controls and monitoring in law enforcement to prevent unauthorized data access and sharing.
What was the most significant recommendation implemented to improve cybersecurity ?
Most Significant Recommendation Implemented: The most significant recommendation implemented to improve cybersecurity was Train staff on proper data handling (e.g., address verification) to prevent human-error breaches., Document breach responses meticulously to support legal defenses in potential lawsuits., Implement stricter access controls, regular audits, and enhanced monitoring of sensitive data access within law enforcement agencies., Evaluate insurance coverage for GDPR-related litigation and non-material damages., Consider the threshold for issuing GDPR notifications, balancing transparency with litigation exposure., Revisit data breach response plans to assess litigation risks before notifying affected individuals., Prepare for class-action risks under the EU Representative Actions Directive and especially for large-scale breaches..
References
What is the most recent source of information about an incident ?
Most Recent Source: The most recent source of information about an incident are UK Court of Appeal Judgment: Farley v Paymaster, European Court of Justice Judgment: Quirinbank (Case C-665/23), UK Supreme Court Case and EU Representative Actions Directive.
Investigation Status
What is the current status of the most recent investigation ?
Current Status of Most Recent Investigation: The current status of the most recent investigation is Closed (Legal Rulings Issued).
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
What was the most recent stakeholder advisory issued ?
Most Recent Stakeholder Advisory: The most recent stakeholder advisory issued was Companies should anticipate higher GDPR litigation risks and adjust compliance strategies accordingly., Legal teams should collaborate with data protection officers to align breach responses with litigation defenses., .
What was the most recent customer advisory issued ?
Most Recent Customer Advisory: The most recent customer advisory issued were an Affected individuals in the UK/EU may now have broader grounds to claim compensation for GDPR breaches and even without proven harm.Monitor communications from organizations involved in data breaches for potential legal recourse.
Post-Incident Analysis
What was the most significant root cause identified in post-incident analysis ?
Most Significant Root Cause: The most significant root cause identified in post-incident analysis was Human error (incorrect mailing addresses in Farley case)Improper recipient selection (Quirinbank case)Lack of verification processes for sensitive data dissemination, Lack of access controls and monitoring, insider threat.
What was the most significant corrective action taken based on post-incident analysis ?
Most Significant Corrective Action: The most significant corrective action taken based on post-incident analysis was Implement address verification protocols for physical mail containing PII.Enhance email recipient validation for sensitive communications.Conduct GDPR litigation risk assessments as part of breach response planning..
.png)
Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)
Description
Typemill is a flat-file, Markdown-based CMS designed for informational documentation websites. A reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) exists in the login error view template `login.twig` of versions 2.19.1 and below. The `username` value can be echoed back without proper contextual encoding when authentication fails. An attacker can execute script in the login page context. This issue has been fixed in version 2.19.2.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description
A DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the DomainCheckerApp class within domain/script.js of Sourcecodester Domain Availability Checker v1.0. The vulnerability occurs because the application improperly handles user-supplied data in the createResultElement method by using the unsafe innerHTML property to render domain search results.
Description
A Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in Sourcecodester Modern Image Gallery App v1.0 within the gallery/upload.php component. The application fails to properly validate uploaded file contents. Additionally, the application preserves the user-supplied file extension during the save process. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to upload arbitrary PHP code by spoofing the MIME type as an image, leading to full system compromise.
Description
A UNIX symbolic link following issue in the jailer component in Firecracker version v1.13.1 and earlier and 1.14.0 on Linux may allow a local host user with write access to the pre-created jailer directories to overwrite arbitrary host files via a symlink attack during the initialization copy at jailer startup, if the jailer is executed with root privileges. To mitigate this issue, users should upgrade to version v1.13.2 or 1.14.1 or above.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H/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
An information disclosure vulnerability exists in the /srvs/membersrv/getCashiers endpoint of the Aptsys gemscms backend platform thru 2025-05-28. This unauthenticated endpoint returns a list of cashier accounts, including names, email addresses, usernames, and passwords hashed using MD5. As MD5 is a broken cryptographic function, the hashes can be easily reversed using public tools, exposing user credentials in plaintext. This allows remote attackers to perform unauthorized logins and potentially gain access to sensitive POS operations or backend functions.
Access Data Using Our API
Get company history
curl -i -X GET 'https://api.rankiteo.com/underwriter-getcompany-history?linkedin_id=sussex-police' -H 'apikey: YOUR_API_KEY_HERE'
RapidWhat Do We Measure ?
Incident
Finding
Grade
Digital Assets
Every week, Rankiteo analyzes billions of signals to give organizations a sharper, faster view of emerging risks. With deeper, more actionable intelligence at their fingertips, security teams can outpace threat actors, respond instantly to Zero-Day attacks, and dramatically shrink their risk exposure window.
These are some of the factors we use to calculate the overall score:
Network Security
Identify exposed access points, detect misconfigured SSL certificates, and uncover vulnerabilities across the network infrastructure.
SBOM (Software Bill of Materials)
Gain visibility into the software components used within an organization to detect vulnerabilities, manage risk, and ensure supply chain security.
CMDB (Configuration Management Database)
Monitor and manage all IT assets and their configurations to ensure accurate, real-time visibility across the company's technology environment.
Threat Intelligence
Leverage real-time insights on active threats, malware campaigns, and emerging vulnerabilities to proactively defend against evolving cyberattacks.
Rankiteo is a unified scoring and risk platform that analyzes billions of signals weekly to help organizations gain faster, more actionable insights into emerging threats. Empowering teams to outpace adversaries and reduce exposure.
