Agricultural Bank of China
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 800 and 849
wholly state-owned
NAICS: 52211
NAICS Definition: Commercial Banking
Employees: 14,747
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Comparison Overview
Agricultural Bank of China
VS
Santander
Santander
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 800 and 849
Banco Santander (SAN SM, STD US, BNC LN) is a leading commercial bank, founded in 1857 and headquartered in Spain and one of the largest banks in the world by market capitalization. The group’s activities are consolidated into five global businesses: Retail & Commercial Banking, Digital Consumer Bank, Corporate & Investment Banking (CIB), Wealth Management & Insurance and Payments (PagoNxt and Cards). This operating model allows the bank to better leverage its unique combination of global scale and local leadership. Santander aims to be the best open financial services platform providing services to individuals, SMEs, corporates, financial institutions and governments. The bank’s purpose is to help people and businesses prosper in a simple, personal and fair way. Santander is building a more responsible bank and has made a number of commitments to support this objective, including raising €220 billion in green financing between 2019 and 2030. In the first quarter of 2024, Banco Santander had €1.3 trillion in total funds, 166 million customers, 8,400 branches and 211,000 employees.
NAICS: 52211
NAICS Definition: Commercial Banking
Employees: 136,989
Subsidiaries: 26
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Compliance Badges Comparison
Security & Compliance Standards Overview
Agricultural Bank of China
ISO 27001
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
Not verified
GDPR
Not verified
PCI DSS
Not verified
HIPAA
Not verified
Santander
ISO 27001
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
Not verified
GDPR
Not verified
PCI DSS
Not verified
HIPAA
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Agricultural Bank of China
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Santander
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Agricultural Bank of China in 2025.
Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Santander in 2025.
Incident History — Agricultural Bank of China (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Agricultural Bank of China cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Incident History — Santander (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Santander cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Notable Incidents
Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company
Agricultural Bank of China
Incidents
No Incident
Santander
Incidents
No Incident
FAQ
Agricultural Bank of China company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Santander company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.
Historically, Santander company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Agricultural Bank of China company.
In the current year, Santander company and Agricultural Bank of China company have not reported any cyber incidents.
Neither Santander company nor Agricultural Bank of China company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.
Neither Santander company nor Agricultural Bank of China company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.
Neither Santander company nor Agricultural Bank of China company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China company nor Santander company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China nor Santander holds any compliance certifications.
Neither company holds any compliance certifications.
Santander company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Agricultural Bank of China company.
Santander company employs more people globally than Agricultural Bank of China company, reflecting its scale as a Banking.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China nor Santander holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China nor Santander holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China nor Santander holds ISO 27001 certification.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China nor Santander holds PCI DSS certification.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China nor Santander holds HIPAA certification.
Neither Agricultural Bank of China nor Santander holds GDPR certification.
Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)
Description
NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description
uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description
A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
Description
MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description
A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
