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

Comparison Overview

WorkanaWorkana
VS
Alight SolutionsAlight Solutions
Workana

Workana

Castillo 1366, Buenos Aires, City of Buenos Aires, 1414, AR

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.workana.com
767/1000Fair

With +10 years in the market, Workana is the largest remote work platform for hiring top talent in Latin America. We match great talent with exciting opportunities and we love doing it. We believe remote work promotes equal and unprecedented growth opportunities for b...

NAICS:541612
NAICS Definition:Human Resources Consulting Services
Employees:4,839
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Alight Solutions

Alight Solutions

320 S Canal St., 50th floor suite 5000, Chicago, IL, US, 60606

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.alight.com
753/1000Fair

Alight is a leading cloud-based human capital technology and services provider for many of the world’s largest organizations. Through the administration of employee benefits, Alight powers confident health, wealth, leaves and wellbeing decisions for 35 million people an...

NAICS:541612
NAICS Definition:Human Resources Consulting Services
Employees:10,747
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Workana

Workana

-
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
Alight Solutions

Alight Solutions

-
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 Human Resources Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Workana in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Human Resources Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Alight Solutions in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Workana (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Workana cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Alight Solutions (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Alight Solutions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Workana

Workana

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Alight Solutions

Alight Solutions

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ALI642072525
🔒 Incident : Breach
ALI731082025

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2