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

Comparison Overview

Wright County, MinnesotaWright County, Minnesota
VS
Government of AlbertaGovernment of Alberta
Wright County, Minnesota

Wright County, Minnesota

3650 Braddock Ave NE, Buffalo, 55313, US

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.co.wright.mn.us
761/1000Fair

Wright County was established in 1855 and is located just to the northwest of the Twin Cities. The County seat is Buffalo, MN. Wright County is Minnesota's fastest growing county with 17 cities and 18 townships nestled among 200+ lakes and over 4,700 acres of parklands...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:556
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Government of Alberta

Government of Alberta

Public Service Commission, Edmonton, T5J 2N2, CA

Last Update: 30/06/2026

View Profile
Between 600 and 649
http://www.alberta.ca
638/1000Poor

Work with the Alberta government to build a stronger province for current and future generations. We offer diverse and rewarding employment opportunities in an environment that encourages continuous learning and career growth. We are one of the largest employers in...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:19,649
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Wright County, Minnesota

Wright County, Minnesota

-
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
Government of Alberta

Government of Alberta

-
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 Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Wright County, Minnesota in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

Government of Alberta has 4.76% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Wright County, Minnesota (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Wright County, Minnesota cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Government of Alberta (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Government of Alberta 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...
Wright County, Minnesota

Wright County, Minnesota

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
WRI1269222
Government of Alberta

Government of Alberta

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
GOVCEN1782851713
🔒 Incident : Breach
GOVELE1777661104

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-57980
SUMMARY

Authentication bypass using an alternate path or channel in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to perform tampering over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-17
UPDATED
Date2026-07-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56741
SUMMARY

JLine is a Java library for handling console input. Prior to 3.30.14, 4.0.16, and 4.2.1, the JLine3 Telnet server remote-telnet module does not apply an upper bound to terminal dimensions received via the Telnet NAWS option, and TelnetIO.handleNAWS() in TelnetIO.java:856-879 reads client-supplied width and height as 16-bit unsigned integers and passes values such as 65535x65535 to setTerminalGeometry(), allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to repeatedly alternate values and trigger continuous expensive rendering work that causes CPU exhaustion and denial of service. This issue is fixed in versions 3.30.14, 4.0.16, and 4.2.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-17
UPDATED
Date2026-07-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-56740
SUMMARY

JLine is a Java library for handling console input. Prior to 3.30.14, 4.0.16, and 4.2.1, the JLine3 Telnet server remote-telnet module does not limit the number of environment variables a client may inject via the Telnet NEW-ENVIRON option, and TelnetIO.readNEVariables() in TelnetIO.java:1127-1180 stores each variable pair in a HashMap held by ConnectionData, allowing an unauthenticated attacker to flood unique variable pairs before the terminating IAC SE byte and exhaust JVM heap memory with an OutOfMemoryError. This issue is fixed in versions 3.30.14, 4.0.16, and 4.2.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-17
UPDATED
Date2026-07-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-56171
SUMMARY

Exposure of private personal information to an unauthorized actor in Windows RDP allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-17
UPDATED
Date2026-07-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-54335
SUMMARY

Feathersjs is a framework for creating web APIs and real-time applications with TypeScript or JavaScript. In 5.0.44 and earlier, the _.merge(target, source) utility exported by @feathersjs/commons recursively merges source into target by iterating Object.keys(source). When source was produced by JSON.parse and contains a __proto__, constructor, or prototype key, that key is returned as an own-enumerable property; the recursive merge then resolves target['__proto__'] to Object.prototype and writes attacker-supplied properties onto it, polluting the prototype for all plain objects in the process for the lifetime of the Node process. This issue is fixed in version 5.0.45.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-17
UPDATED
Date2026-07-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2