Comparison Overview

AIA Singapore

VS

Chubb

AIA Singapore

1 Robinson Road, #13-00, AIA Tower, Singapore, SG, 048542
Last Update: 2026-01-17

AIA Singapore is part of the AIA Group, which is the largest independent publicly listed pan-Asian life insurance group in the world and the second largest life insurance company in the world by market capitalisation. As a leading company in Singapore, AIA Singapore takes a leadership role in contributing to the nation’s social and economic progress by enabling families to live healthier, longer, better lives. Together with one of Singapore’s biggest and most committed team of AIA Financial Services Consultants, our dedicated staff are united in continually pursuing this goal. With a focus on providing excellent service to our customers, we partner with individuals, families and corporates in Singapore for a brighter and more prosperous future for all. Committed to the vision of being the pre-eminent life insurer in the country, admired for excellent service and best practices, AIA Singapore conducts our business according to an operating philosophy of “Doing the Right Thing, in the Right Way, with the Right People."​ Any personal information supplied by you in connection with your use of this social media platform may be collected, stored, handled, used and deleted in accordance with the AIA Singapore Privacy Policy available at http://www.aia.com.sg/en/index/personal-data-policy.html

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 3,288
Subsidiaries: 12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Chubb

Bärengasse 32, CH, CH-8001
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 800 and 849

Chubb is a world leader in insurance. With operations in 54 countries and territories, Chubb provides commercial and personal property and casualty insurance, personal accident and supplemental health insurance, reinsurance and life insurance to a diverse group of clients. As an underwriting company, we assess, assume and manage risk with insight and discipline. We service and pay our claims fairly and promptly. The company is also defined by its extensive product and service offerings, broad distribution capabilities, exceptional financial strength and local operations globally. Parent company Chubb Limited is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: CB) and is a component of the S&P 500 index. Chubb maintains executive offices in Zurich, New York, London, Paris and other locations, and employs approximately 40,000 people worldwide. Read our Social Media Guidelines here: https://www.chubb.com/us-en/about-chubb/chubbs-social-media-guidelines.aspx Notre section « À propos » est également disponible en français, ici: https://www.chubb.com/ca-fr/about-chubb-in-canada/a-propos-de-chubb-au-canada.aspx

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 39,339
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aia-singapore.jpeg
AIA Singapore
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/chubb.jpeg
Chubb
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
AIA Singapore
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Chubb
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AIA Singapore in 2026.

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Chubb in 2026.

Incident History — AIA Singapore (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AIA Singapore cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Chubb (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chubb cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aia-singapore.jpeg
AIA Singapore
Incidents

Date Detected: 03/2019
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chubb.jpeg
Chubb
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Chubb company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to AIA Singapore company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

AIA Singapore company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Chubb company has not reported any.

In the current year, Chubb company and AIA Singapore company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Chubb company nor AIA Singapore company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Chubb company nor AIA Singapore company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Chubb company nor AIA Singapore company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither AIA Singapore company nor Chubb company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither AIA Singapore nor Chubb holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

AIA Singapore company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Chubb company.

Chubb company employs more people globally than AIA Singapore company, reflecting its scale as a Insurance.

Neither AIA Singapore nor Chubb holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither AIA Singapore nor Chubb holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither AIA Singapore nor Chubb holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither AIA Singapore nor Chubb holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither AIA Singapore nor Chubb holds HIPAA certification.

Neither AIA Singapore nor Chubb holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N