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

Comparison Overview

AB InBev GCC IndiaAB InBev GCC India
VS
TupyTupy
AB InBev GCC India

AB InBev GCC India

Nagavara Main Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka, 560045, IN

Last Update: 20/03/2026

View Profile
775/1000Fair

AB InBev is a multinational beverage and brewing company headquartered in Leuven, Belgium with an outstanding portfolio of over 500 brands and countless beer varieties. We are committed to driving growth that improves the lives of people across the globe. As a company,...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:1,386
Subsidiaries:34
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Tupy

Tupy

Rua Albano Schmidt 3400, Joinville, 89227-220, BR

Last Update: 07/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.tupy.com.br
784/1000Fair

Tupy is a Brazilian company specialized in developing and manufacturing highly-engineered structural cast iron components applied to complex metallurgical and geometrical components extensively used in capital goods that serve freight transport, construction industry, ...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:10,906
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AB InBev GCC India

AB InBev GCC India

-
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
Tupy

Tupy

-
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 Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AB InBev GCC India in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tupy in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - AB InBev GCC India (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AB InBev GCC India 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 - Tupy (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tupy cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
AB InBev GCC India

AB InBev GCC India

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Tupy

Tupy

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-103761
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a memory exhaustion vulnerability in TransferMetadata::receivePeerNotify that allows unauthenticated attackers to grow process memory without limit. Attackers can repeatedly send notify frames up to 1 MB to the handshake RPC port, filling the uncapped notifys vector until the out-of-memory killer terminates the engine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-103760
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a denial of service vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to block the handshake daemon by never reading replies. Attackers can send a Metadata request to the handshake RPC port and stall SocketHandShakePlugin's single listener thread in writeFully(), breaking all subsequent handshakes, metadata fetches, notify and probe requests.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2025-71427
SUMMARY

Office-PowerPoint-MCP-Server through 2.0.7 contains a path traversal vulnerability that allows MCP callers to write and read files outside the working directory by supplying absolute paths or ../ sequences. Attackers can steer an AI agent via prompt injection to abuse save_presentation, open_presentation, or manage_image output_path to overwrite any server-writable file or load external files.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86344
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in 389-ds-base. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a complete LDAP operation followed by the first bytes of an incomplete LDAPMessage on the same connection, causing the server to hand that connection to a second worker thread before the first worker's result is flushed. The second worker blocks until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout while holding the connection mutex, preventing delivery of the completed operation's result. Repeating this across a small number of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread pool size exhausts the entire pool under default configuration, denying service to all clients (anonymous and authenticated, plaintext and TLS) for as long as the attacker maintains the connections.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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-2026-71454
SUMMARY

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') vulnerability in CWE-79 - Cross-site Scripting CAPEC-63 allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). This issue affects CAPEC-63: before 3.0b63.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA