Comparison Overview

US Army

VS

Army National Guard

US Army

1500 Army Navy Dr, Arlington, US
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 800 and 849

Welcome to the official U.S. Army LinkedIn page. The U.S. Army’s mission is to fight and win our Nation’s wars by providing prompt, sustained land dominance across the full range of military operations and spectrum of conflict in support of combatant commanders. If you're looking for news about the U.S. Army, visit http://www.army.mil/ For information about U.S. Army career opportunities https://www.goarmy.com/?iom=BNL7-22-0029_N_OSOC_OCPA_LI_ocpagen_xx_xx.

NAICS: 92811
NAICS Definition: National Security
Employees: 355,851
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Army National Guard

111 S George Mason Dr, Arlington, Virginia, 22204, US
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 700 and 749

Welcome to the Army National Guard's page on LinkedIn.  The Army National Guard, also known as the National Guard, is one component of The Army (which consists of the Active Army, the Army National Guard, and the Army Reserve). National Guard Soldiers serve both community and country. Our versatility enables us to respond to domestic emergencies, overseas combat missions, counterdrug efforts, reconstruction missions and more. If you are interested in learning more about the career opportunities and educational benefits made possible through service in the National Guard, visit www.NATIONALGUARD.com or talk with our team today at https://bit.ly/2uXk12R. For those seeking official information and news tied to the Army National Guard, visit www.ng.mil.

NAICS: 92811
NAICS Definition: National Security
Employees: 56,864
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/us-army.jpeg
US Army
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/army-national-guard.jpeg
Army National Guard
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
US Army
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Army National Guard
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Armed Forces Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for US Army in 2026.

Incidents vs Armed Forces Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Army National Guard in 2026.

Incident History — US Army (X = Date, Y = Severity)

US Army cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Army National Guard (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Army National Guard cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/us-army.jpeg
US Army
Incidents

Date Detected: 08/2018
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 07/2018
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Exploitation of Basic Security Vulnerability
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 06/2015
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Website Hacking
Motivation: Political
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/army-national-guard.jpeg
Army National Guard
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Exploiting vulnerabilities in Cisco's routers and similar hardware
Motivation: Disrupt networks, Steal key intelligence, Prepare for potential conflict over Taiwan
Blog: Blog

FAQ

US Army company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Army National Guard company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

US Army company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Army National Guard company.

In the current year, Army National Guard company and US Army company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Army National Guard company nor US Army company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Army National Guard company and US Army company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

US Army company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Army National Guard company has not reported such incidents publicly.

US Army company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Army National Guard company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither US Army nor Army National Guard holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

US Army company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Army National Guard company.

US Army company employs more people globally than Army National Guard company, reflecting its scale as a Armed Forces.

Neither US Army nor Army National Guard holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither US Army nor Army National Guard holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither US Army nor Army National Guard holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither US Army nor Army National Guard holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither US Army nor Army National Guard holds HIPAA certification.

Neither US Army nor Army National Guard holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N