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

Comparison Overview

Track Utilities, LLCTrack Utilities, LLC
VS
Kier GroupKier Group
Track Utilities, LLC

Track Utilities, LLC

undefined, Meridian, ID, 83642, US

Last Update: 21/04/2026

View Profile
752/1000Fair

Track Utilities is a Peak Utility Services Company. We are the leading provider of Energy & Telecommunication Solutions in the Northwest and Intermountain West. We perform new construction, maintenance and repair for transmission and distribution powerlines and substati...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:96
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Kier Group

Kier Group

Cavendish Place, UK, GB

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.kier.co.uk
755/1000Fair

Our purpose is to sustainably deliver infrastructure which is vital to the UK. As a leading provider of infrastructure services, construction and property developments, we are committed to delivering for communities and leaving lasting legacies through our work. We are...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:10,990
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Track Utilities, LLC

Track Utilities, LLC

-
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
Kier Group

Kier Group

-
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 Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Track Utilities, LLC in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Kier Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Track Utilities, LLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Track Utilities, LLC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Kier Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Kier Group 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...
Track Utilities, LLC

Track Utilities, LLC

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Kier Group

Kier Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1