Comparison Overview

USC Information Technology Services (ITS)

VS

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

USC Information Technology Services (ITS)

1510 San Pablo St, None, Los Angeles, CA, US, 90007
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 700 and 749

Bringing together a team of diverse and talented professionals, we provide the central IT services that support USC's schools, hospitals, research centers, and administrative units. Through the digital transformation initiatives we recently launched, we aim to develop an environment of continuous service improvement, founded on cross-functional teamwork, industry best practices, innovation, and a commitment to the customer experience. 

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 111
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

410 Terry Ave N, Seattle, WA, US, 98019
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

Launched in 2006, Amazon Web Services (AWS) began exposing key infrastructure services to businesses in the form of web services -- now widely known as cloud computing. The ultimate benefit of cloud computing, and AWS, is the ability to leverage a new business model and turn capital infrastructure expenses into variable costs. Businesses no longer need to plan and procure servers and other IT resources weeks or months in advance. Using AWS, businesses can take advantage of Amazon's expertise and economies of scale to access resources when their business needs them, delivering results faster and at a lower cost. Today, Amazon Web Services provides a highly reliable, scalable, low-cost infrastructure platform in the cloud that powers hundreds of thousands of businesses in 190 countries around the world. With data center locations in the U.S., Europe, Singapore, and Japan, customers across all industries are taking advantage of our low cost, elastic, open and flexible, secure platform.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 143,678
Subsidiaries: 83
12-month incidents
5
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
5

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/uscitservices.jpeg
USC Information Technology Services (ITS)
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/amazon-web-services.jpeg
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
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
USC Information Technology Services (ITS)
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for USC Information Technology Services (ITS) in 2025.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

Amazon Web Services (AWS) has 825.93% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — USC Information Technology Services (ITS) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

USC Information Technology Services (ITS) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Amazon Web Services (AWS) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Amazon Web Services (AWS) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/uscitservices.jpeg
USC Information Technology Services (ITS)
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Loss of External Hard Drive
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/amazon-web-services.jpeg
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Exposed Docker API, Misconfigured AWS EC2 Instances, Python Docker SDK
Motivation: Financial Gain, Disruption, Cybercrime-as-a-Service
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Backend Update Bug
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Amazon Web Services (AWS) company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company.

In the current year, Amazon Web Services (AWS) company has reported more cyber incidents than USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Amazon Web Services (AWS) company and USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither USC Information Technology Services (ITS) nor Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) company employs more people globally than USC Information Technology Services (ITS) company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither USC Information Technology Services (ITS) nor Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither USC Information Technology Services (ITS) nor Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither USC Information Technology Services (ITS) nor Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither USC Information Technology Services (ITS) nor Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither USC Information Technology Services (ITS) nor Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds HIPAA certification.

Neither USC Information Technology Services (ITS) nor Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

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