Comparison Overview
Toronto Police Service

Toronto Police Service
40 College St, Toronto, M5G 2J3, CA
Last Update: 04/05/2026
The Toronto Police Service is the fourth largest municipal police service in North America with over 5500 officers and 2200 civilian support staff. The Service enjoys a well-earned reputation as a world leader in policing and is committed to excellence, innovation, qua...

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
J. Edgar Hoover Building, Washington, 20535-0001, US
Last Update: 30/06/2026
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 ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Toronto Police Service







Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Law Enforcement Industry Avg (This Year)
Toronto Police Service has 43.18% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Law Enforcement Industry Avg (This Year)
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has 1126.42% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Toronto Police Service (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Toronto Police Service cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Toronto Police Service

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.
The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.