Comparison Overview

Xunta de Galicia

VS

British Gas

Xunta de Galicia

San Caetano, s/n, Santiago de Compostela, 15781, ES
Last Update: 2026-04-01
Between 750 and 799

A Xunta aparece definida no Estatuto de Autonomía, aprobado en 1981, como órgano colexiado do Goberno de Galicia. Na actualidade, a Xunta está composta polo presidente e dez conselleiros. A comunidade exerce as súas funcións administrativas a través da Xunta e dos seus entes e órganos dependentes. Correspóndelle á Xunta aprobar os regulamentos xerais dos seus propios tributos e elaborar as normas regulamentarias precisas para xestionar os impostos estatais cedidos de acordo cos termos desta cesión e a elaboración e aplicación do orzamento da Comunidade Autónoma de Galicia, que deben ser examinados polo Parlamento. A Xunta tamén se encarga de coordinar a actividade das Deputacións Provinciais do seu territorio naquelo que afecte dun xeito directo ao interese xeral de Galicia, e para iso unirá os orzamentos que elas elaboren de seu. Así mesmo, poderá encomendar a execución dos seus acordos ás devanditas deputacións, que serán as encargadas de levar a cabo as funcións transferidas polo Executivo autonómico.

NAICS: 22
NAICS Definition: Utilities
Employees: 10,790
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

British Gas

Maidenhead Road, Windsor, GB
Last Update: 2026-04-02
Between 750 and 799

Taking care of things. At British Gas we’re always looking at new ways to save energy and money for our customers. Everything we do from our trusted engineers to helpful call centre agents, and innovative product owners to digital marketing specialists, is about providing affordable, hassle-free service to keep British homes and businesses running smoothly. That’s why over 10 million UK homes and half a million businesses trust British Gas.

NAICS: 22
NAICS Definition: Utilities
Employees: 10,282
Subsidiaries: 10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/xunta-de-galicia.jpeg
Xunta de Galicia
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/british-gas.jpeg
British Gas
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
Xunta de Galicia
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
British Gas
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Utilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Xunta de Galicia in 2026.

Incidents vs Utilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for British Gas in 2026.

Incident History — Xunta de Galicia (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Xunta de Galicia cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — British Gas (X = Date, Y = Severity)

British Gas cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/xunta-de-galicia.jpeg
Xunta de Galicia
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/british-gas.jpeg
British Gas
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2020
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Ransomware
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2015
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Credential Stuffing
Motivation: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Xunta de Galicia company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to British Gas company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

British Gas company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Xunta de Galicia company has not reported any.

In the current year, British Gas company and Xunta de Galicia company have not reported any cyber incidents.

British Gas company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Xunta de Galicia company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither British Gas company nor Xunta de Galicia company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither British Gas company nor Xunta de Galicia company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Xunta de Galicia company nor British Gas company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Xunta de Galicia nor British Gas holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

British Gas company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Xunta de Galicia company.

Xunta de Galicia company employs more people globally than British Gas company, reflecting its scale as a Utilities.

Neither Xunta de Galicia nor British Gas holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Xunta de Galicia nor British Gas holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Xunta de Galicia nor British Gas holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Xunta de Galicia nor British Gas holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Xunta de Galicia nor British Gas holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Xunta de Galicia nor British Gas holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in itsourcecode Payroll Management System 1.0. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /manage_user.php of the component Parameter Handler. Performing a manipulation of the argument ID results in sql injection. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

A vulnerability was identified in Axiomatic Bento4 up to 1.6.0-641. Affected is the function AP4_BitReader::SkipBits of the file Ap4Dac4Atom.cpp of the component DSI v1 Parser. Such manipulation of the argument n_presentations leads to heap-based buffer overflow. The attack needs to be performed locally. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

A vulnerability was determined in Axiomatic Bento4 up to 1.6.0-641. This impacts the function AP4_BitReader::ReadCache of the file Ap4Dac4Atom.cpp of the component MP4 File Parser. This manipulation causes heap-based buffer overflow. The attack needs to be launched locally. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

iccDEV provides a set of libraries and tools for working with ICC color management profiles. Prior to version 2.3.1.6, there is a heap-buffer-overflow (HBO) in icAnsiToUtf8() in the XML conversion path. The issue is triggered by a crafted ICC profile which causes icAnsiToUtf8(std::string&, char const*) to treat an input buffer as a C-string and call operations that rely on strlen()/null-termination. AddressSanitizer reports an out-of-bounds READ of size 115 past a 114-byte heap allocation, with the failure observed while running the iccToXml tool. This issue has been patched in version 2.3.1.6.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

iccDEV provides a set of libraries and tools for working with ICC color management profiles. Prior to version 2.3.1.6, there is a stack-buffer-overflow (SBO) in CIccTagFixedNum<>::GetValues() and a related bug chain. The primary crash is an AddressSanitizer-reported WRITE of size 4 that overflows a 4-byte stack variable (rv) via the call chain CIccTagFixedNum::GetValues() -> CIccTagStruct::GetElemNumberValue(). This issue has been patched in version 2.3.1.6.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H