Comparison Overview

USM

VS

Mitie

USM

1800 Markley St. Ste. 1880 Norristown, PA 19401, US
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

USM, an EMCOR company, specializes in providing non-core, mission critical facilities maintenance and management services to large organizations with geographically dispersed properties in various industries such as retail, restaurants, banking, telecommunications, and others with multi-location business operations. USM’s team works with clients to eliminate the task of managing multiple service contracts, to proactively create planned and corrective maintenance strategies, and to streamline billing, reporting, and other administrative functions, so their clients can focus on their core business. Regardless of the type of service - whether it’s electrical, HVAC, repair and maintenance, landscaping, snow and ice management, or janitorial and floor care - USM takes a unique, total supply chain management approach to delivering the outcomes that their clients desire.

NAICS: 5612
NAICS Definition: Facilities Support Services
Employees: 10,001
Subsidiaries: 73
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Mitie

The Shard, Level 12, 32 London Bridge Street, London, UK, SE1 9SG, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1987, Mitie is the UK’s leading facilities management and professional services company. We offer a range of specialist services including Security, Engineering Services, Cleaning, Landscaping, Energy and Property Consultancy, Property Maintenance, and Custody Support Services. Mitie employs 77,500 people across the country, looking after a large, diverse, blue-chip customer base, from banks and retailers, to hospitals, schools and government offices. We take care of our customers’ people and buildings, by delivering the basics brilliantly and by deploying advanced technology. We are pioneers in the Connected Workspace, using smart analytics to provide valuable insight and deliver efficiencies to create outstanding work environments for customers.

NAICS: 5612
NAICS Definition: Facilities Support Services
Employees: 17,395
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/usm.jpeg
USM
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/mitie.jpeg
Mitie
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
USM
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Mitie
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Facilities Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for USM in 2025.

Incidents vs Facilities Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mitie in 2025.

Incident History — USM (X = Date, Y = Severity)

USM cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Mitie (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mitie cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/usm.jpeg
USM
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: External System Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2014
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Theft of Laptop
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mitie.jpeg
Mitie
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Mitie company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to USM company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

USM company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Mitie company has not reported any.

In the current year, Mitie company and USM company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Mitie company nor USM company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

USM company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Mitie company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Mitie company nor USM company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither USM company nor Mitie company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither USM nor Mitie holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

USM company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Mitie company.

Mitie company employs more people globally than USM company, reflecting its scale as a Facilities Services.

Neither USM nor Mitie holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither USM nor Mitie holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither USM nor Mitie holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither USM nor Mitie holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither USM nor Mitie holds HIPAA certification.

Neither USM nor Mitie 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