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

Comparison Overview

Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlusCrocker Communications - Now AccessPlus
VS
TelefónicaTelefónica
Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus

Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus

101 Munson Street, Greenfield, 01301, US

Last Update: 16/07/2026

View Profile
735/1000Moderate

Crocker Communications has now joined AccessPlus! As a trusted provider in the Western Massachusetts area for 20+ years, our connectivity and voice solutions reliably connects communities across the northeast region. AccessPlus is continually expanding our fiber servic...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:59
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Telefónica

Telefónica

Spain, Madrid, 28050, ES

Last Update: 11/09/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
http://www.telefonica.com
577/1000Very Poor

Telefónica is today one of the largest telecommunications companies in the world in terms of market capitalisation and number of customers. We have the best infrastructure, as well as an innovative range of digital and data services; therefore, we are favorably position...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:122,141
Subsidiaries:27
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus

Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus

-
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
Telefónica

Telefónica

-
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 Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus has 48.45% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Telefónica in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Telefónica 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...
Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus

Crocker Communications - Now AccessPlus

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
ACC1784190733
Telefónica

Telefónica

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
TEL1766404766
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
DJIJPMTELGOO1789086449
🔒 Incident : Breach
MOVTEL1767881948

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA