Comparison Overview

Fugro

VS

AECOM

Fugro

Veurse Achterweg 10, Leidschendam, 2264 SG, NL
Last Update: 2026-04-01
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.fugro.com

We are the world’s leading Geo-data specialist, collecting and analysing comprehensive information about the Earth and the structures built upon it. Through integrated data acquisition, analysis and advice, we unlock insights from Geo-data to help our clients design, build and operate their assets in a safe, sustainable and efficient manner. Learn more about us: https://www.youtube.com/fugro https://www.facebook.com/fugro https://twitter.com/fugro https://www.instagram.com/fugro/

NAICS: 237
NAICS Definition: Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Employees: 10,678
Subsidiaries: 5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

AECOM

13355 Noel Road, Suite 400, Dallas, Texas, US, 75240
Last Update: 2026-04-01
Between 750 and 799
http://www.aecom.com

AECOM is the global infrastructure leader, committed to delivering a better world. As a trusted professional services firm powered by deep technical abilities, we solve our clients’ complex challenges in water, environment, energy, transportation and buildings. Our teams partner with public- and private-sector clients to create innovative, sustainable and resilient solutions throughout the project lifecycle – from advisory, planning, design and engineering to program and construction management. AECOM is a Fortune 500 firm that had revenue of $16.1 billion in fiscal year 2024. Learn more at aecom.com.

NAICS: 237
NAICS Definition: Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Employees: 74,394
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fugro.jpeg
Fugro
—
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/aecom.jpeg
AECOM
—
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
Fugro
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
AECOM
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Civil Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Fugro in 2026.

Incidents vs Civil Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AECOM in 2026.

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

Fugro cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

AECOM cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fugro.jpeg
Fugro
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aecom.jpeg
AECOM
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2014
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

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

In the current year, AECOM company and Fugro company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither AECOM company nor Fugro company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

AECOM company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Fugro company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither AECOM company nor Fugro company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Fugro company nor AECOM company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Fugro nor AECOM holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

AECOM company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Fugro company.

AECOM company employs more people globally than Fugro company, reflecting its scale as a Civil Engineering.

Neither Fugro nor AECOM holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Fugro nor AECOM holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Fugro nor AECOM holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Fugro nor AECOM holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Fugro nor AECOM holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Fugro nor AECOM holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

nimiq/core-rs-albatross is a Rust implementation of the Nimiq Proof-of-Stake protocol based on the Albatross consensus algorithm. Prior to version 1.3.0, two peer-facing consensus request handlers assume that the history index is always available and call blockchain.history_store.history_index().unwrap() directly. That assumption is false by construction. HistoryStoreProxy::history_index() explicitly returns None for the valid HistoryStoreProxy::WithoutIndex state. when a full node is syncing or otherwise running without the history index, a remote peer can send RequestTransactionsProof or RequestTransactionReceiptsByAddress and trigger an Option::unwrap() panic on the request path. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.0.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 1.5.95, FileTools.download_file() in praisonaiagents validates the destination path but performs no validation on the url parameter, passing it directly to httpx.stream() with follow_redirects=True. An attacker who controls the URL can reach any host accessible from the server including cloud metadata services and internal network services. This issue has been patched in version 1.5.95.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.97, OAuthManager.validate_token() returns True for any token not found in its internal store, which is empty by default. Any HTTP request to the MCP server with an arbitrary Bearer token is treated as authenticated, granting full access to all registered tools and agent capabilities. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.97.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.97, the PraisonAI Gateway server accepts WebSocket connections at /ws and serves agent topology at /info with no authentication. Any network client can connect, enumerate registered agents, and send arbitrary messages to agents and their tool sets. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.97.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.90, MCPToolIndex.search_tools() compiles a caller-supplied string directly as a Python regular expression with no validation, sanitization, or timeout. A crafted regex causes catastrophic backtracking in the re engine, blocking the Python thread for hundreds of seconds and causing a complete service outage. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.90.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References