Comparison Overview

A1 Telekom Austria Group

VS

BCM One

A1 Telekom Austria Group

Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 750 and 799

WE ARE EMPOWERING DIGITAL LIFE We don't know how the world will look like in 2050, but we know that A1 Telekom Austria Group is geared up for current and future demands. We are a leading provider of digital services and communications solutions in Central and Eastern Europe, offering a state-of-the art network infrastructure as well as empowering digitalization. 19.000 of our employees and modern broadband infrastructure make digital business and lifestyle possible as well as enable more than 24 mio users to connect everywhere anytime. Our purpose is to Empower Digital Life in areas of communications, payment, entertainment services and integrated business solutions. We do this together with our operating companies in 7 European countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovenia, Belarus, Republic of Serbia and Republic of North Macedonia. Headquartered in Vienna and listed on the Vienna Stock Exchange, the A1 Telekom Austria Group is an European unit of América Móvil, one of the world´s largest wireless services providers. You can follow us also here: https://twitter.com/TA_Group Find out more about us as employer on https://jobs.a1.com/

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 11,462
Subsidiaries: 10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

BCM One

125 Park Avenue, New York, NY, US, 10017
Last Update: 2026-01-13
Between 700 and 749

Founded in 1992, BCM One is a corporate communications company that powers business connectivity for organizations ranging from SMBs to global enterprises. Serving as the parent company to five industry-leading brands, BCM One delivers a comprehensive suite of telecom and cloud communication solutions across the U.S. and around the world. Its portfolio includes: • Pure IP, specializing in enterprise voice and network connectivity across more than 80 countries through a design-led, fully managed approach; • SkySwitch, a white-label UCaaS platform built for MSPs, system integrators, and channel partners; • SIP.US, SIPTRUNK, and Flowroute, offering flexible, self-service SIP trunking and messaging solutions designed for small to mid-sized businesses. Together, BCM One’s family of brands empowers businesses with reliable, scalable, and innovative communication technologies that keep them connected and competitive in a global market.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 313
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/a1-telekom-austria-group.jpeg
A1 Telekom Austria Group
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/business-communications-management.jpeg
BCM One
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
A1 Telekom Austria Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
BCM One
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for A1 Telekom Austria Group in 2026.

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BCM One in 2026.

Incident History — A1 Telekom Austria Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

A1 Telekom Austria Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — BCM One (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BCM One cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/a1-telekom-austria-group.jpeg
A1 Telekom Austria Group
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2022
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2019
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/business-communications-management.jpeg
BCM One
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

A1 Telekom Austria Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to BCM One company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

A1 Telekom Austria Group company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to BCM One company.

In the current year, BCM One company and A1 Telekom Austria Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither BCM One company nor A1 Telekom Austria Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both BCM One company and A1 Telekom Austria Group company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither BCM One company nor A1 Telekom Austria Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group company nor BCM One company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group nor BCM One holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

A1 Telekom Austria Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to BCM One company.

A1 Telekom Austria Group company employs more people globally than BCM One company, reflecting its scale as a Telecommunications.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group nor BCM One holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group nor BCM One holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group nor BCM One holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group nor BCM One holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group nor BCM One holds HIPAA certification.

Neither A1 Telekom Austria Group nor BCM One holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Gradle is a build automation tool, and its native-platform tool provides Java bindings for native APIs. When resolving dependencies in versions before 9.3.0, some exceptions were not treated as fatal errors and would not cause a repository to be disabled. If a build encountered one of these exceptions, Gradle would continue to the next repository in the list and potentially resolve dependencies from a different repository. An exception like NoHttpResponseException can indicate transient errors. If the errors persist after a maximum number of retries, Gradle would continue to the next repository. This behavior could allow an attacker to disrupt the service of a repository and leverage another repository to serve malicious artifacts. This attack requires the attacker to have control over a repository after the disrupted repository. Gradle has introduced a change in behavior in Gradle 9.3.0 to stop searching other repositories when encountering these errors.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N/E:X/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

Gradle is a build automation tool, and its native-platform tool provides Java bindings for native APIs. When resolving dependencies in versions before 9.3.0, some exceptions were not treated as fatal errors and would not cause a repository to be disabled. If a build encountered one of these exceptions, Gradle would continue to the next repository in the list and potentially resolve dependencies from a different repository. If a Gradle build used an unresolvable host name, Gradle would continue to work as long as all dependencies could be resolved from another repository. An unresolvable host name could be caused by allowing a repository's domain name registration to lapse or typo-ing the real domain name. This behavior could allow an attacker to register a service under the host name used by the build and serve malicious artifacts. The attack requires the repository to be listed before others in the build configuration. Gradle has introduced a change in behavior in Gradle 9.3.0 to stop searching other repositories when encountering these errors.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N/E:X/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

node-tar is a Tar for Node.js. The node-tar library (<= 7.5.2) fails to sanitize the linkpath of Link (hardlink) and SymbolicLink entries when preservePaths is false (the default secure behavior). This allows malicious archives to bypass the extraction root restriction, leading to Arbitrary File Overwrite via hardlinks and Symlink Poisoning via absolute symlink targets. This vulnerability is fixed in 7.5.3.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/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

Microsoft Edge Elevation Service exposes a privileged COM interface that inadequately validates the privileges of the calling process. A standard (non‑administrator) local user can invoke the IElevatorEdge interface method LaunchUpdateCmdElevatedAndWait, causing the service to execute privileged update commands as LocalSystem. This allows a non‑administrator to enable or disable Windows Virtualization‑Based Security (VBS) by modifying protected system registry keys under HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\DeviceGuard. Disabling VBS weakens critical platform protections such as Credential Guard, Hypervisor‑protected Code Integrity (HVCI), and the Secure Kernel, resulting in a security feature bypass.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

Improper authorization in Microsoft Power Apps allows an authorized attacker to execute code over a network.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H