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

Comparison Overview

QNB TürkiyeQNB Türkiye
VS
U.S. BankU.S. Bank
QNB Türkiye

QNB Türkiye

Turkey, Istanbul, TR, 34394

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.qnb.com.tr/
783/1000Fair

Finansbank A.Ş. 26 Ekim 1987 tarihinde iş insanı Hüsnü Özyeğin liderliğinde 100 ortakla Bankalar Kanunu ve Türk Ticaret Kanunu hükümleri uyarınca kuruldu. Sektörde hızlı büyeme ile ilk 5 büyük özel banka arasına giren QNB Finansbank, 2006 yılında Yunanistan'ın en büyük ...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:13,374
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
U.S. Bank

U.S. Bank

800 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, 55402, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
791/1000Fair

At U.S. Bank, we help millions of clients achieve their goals with a balance of best-in-class technology and human expertise tailored to individual needs. As the fifth-largest commercial bank in the United States, we’ve built a reputation for strength and stability acro...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:81,770
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
QNB Türkiye

QNB Türkiye

-
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
U.S. Bank

U.S. Bank

-
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 Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for QNB Türkiye in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for U.S. Bank in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - QNB Türkiye (X = Date, Y = Severity)

QNB Türkiye 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 - U.S. Bank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

U.S. Bank 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...
QNB Türkiye

QNB Türkiye

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
U.S. Bank

U.S. Bank

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
US-239072925
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
US-356072525
🔒 Incident : Breach
US-329072525

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19961
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Edimax EW-7478APC 1.04. Affected is the function formWlSiteSurvey of the file /goform/formWlSiteSurvey. Performing a manipulation of the argument selSSID results in buffer overflow. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-16
UPDATED
Date2026-08-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-19960
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in Edimax EW-7478APC 1.04. This impacts the function formWlbasic of the file /goform/formWlbasic. Such manipulation of the argument rootAPmac leads to command injection. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-16
UPDATED
Date2026-08-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.7
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-19959
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Edimax EW-7478APC 1.04. This affects the function formWanTcpipSetup of the file /goform/formWanTcpipSetup. This manipulation of the argument pppUserName causes stack-based buffer overflow. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-16
UPDATED
Date2026-08-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-19958
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in iatsiuk pptr-mcp up to 0.2.7. The impacted element is the function executeCode of the file src/vm-executor.ts of the component execute Tool. The manipulation results in code injection. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-16
UPDATED
Date2026-08-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-19957
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in graphlit graphlit-mcp-server 1.0.1. This affects the function fetch of the file src/tools.ts of the component ssrf-test Endpoint. Such manipulation of the argument url leads to server-side request forgery. The attack may be launched remotely. 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.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-16
UPDATED
Date2026-08-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8