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

Comparison Overview

AccellionXAccellionX
VS
Pitney BowesPitney Bowes
AccellionX

AccellionX

30 N Gould St Ste R SHERIDAN COUNTY Sheridan, WY, 82801, USA, Sheridan, 82801, US

Last Update: 13/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.accellionx.com
750/1000Fair

AccellionX is building the future of startup operations: fully automated offices. Early-stage and growing startups struggle with repetitive tasks, unstructured workflows, and operational chaos. We solve this by building AI-powered internal systems that automate tasks a...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:13
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Pitney Bowes

Pitney Bowes

27 Waterview Dr, Shelton, 06484, US

Last Update: 29/04/2026

View Profile
475/1000Critical

Pitney Bowes is a technology-driven company that provides digital shipping solutions, mailing innovation, and financial services to clients around the world – including more than 90 percent of the Fortune 500. Small businesses to large enterprises, and government entiti...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:12,782
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AccellionX

AccellionX

-
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
Pitney Bowes

Pitney Bowes

-
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 Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AccellionX in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Pitney Bowes has 180.37% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - AccellionX (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AccellionX cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Pitney Bowes (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pitney Bowes 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...
AccellionX

AccellionX

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
FLA245080525
Pitney Bowes

Pitney Bowes

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
INDPITCARBASZARHAL1777466463
🔒 Incident : Breach
PIT1777335822
🔒 Incident : Breach
CARHOLPRI1776630318

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-12191
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Comma AI Openpilot 0.11. This issue affects the function pickle.load/pickle.loads of the file selfdrive/modeld/modeld.py of the component Pickle Module. The manipulation results in deserialization. The attack is only possible with local access. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-14
UPDATED
Date2026-06-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-12190
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Genspark AI Workspace App 2.8.4 on Android. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the component ai.mainfunc.genspark. The manipulation leads to improper authorization in handler for custom url scheme. The attack can only be performed from a local environment. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-14
UPDATED
Date2026-06-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: 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: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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-12189
SUMMARY

A flaw has been found in Moovit Bus & Public Transit App 1.18 on Android. This affects an unknown part of the component com.tranzmate. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper authorization in handler for custom url scheme. The attack can only be executed locally. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-14
UPDATED
Date2026-06-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-12188
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Grit42 Grit up to 0.11.0. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file modules/core/backend/app/controllers/concerns/grit/core/grit_entity_controller.rb of the component GritEntityController. Performing a manipulation results in sql injection. The attack may be initiated 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
Date2026-06-14
UPDATED
Date2026-06-14
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-2026-12187
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in GL.iNet GL-MT3000 up to 4.4.5. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /usr/bin/one_click_upgrade of the component Online Firmware Upgrade Handler. Such manipulation leads to command injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.7 addresses this issue. Upgrading the affected component is advised. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a fixed version of the affected product.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-14
UPDATED
Date2026-06-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8