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

Comparison Overview

Airtel UgandaAirtel Uganda
VS
MTS GroupMTS Group
Airtel Uganda

Airtel Uganda

Plot 16A, Clement Hill, Kampala, Kampala, Kampala, UG, 00256

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.airtel.co.ug/
755/1000Fair

The Airtel experience in Uganda started in 2010, giving Ugandans an unbeatable telecom experience. Today, Airtel Uganda is the fastest growing and innovative telecom in Uganda with over 14 million subscribers. At Airtel, we stand for winning partnerships, growth and qu...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:1,911
Subsidiaries:18
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
MTS Group

MTS Group

Moscow, RU

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.mts.ru
772/1000Fair

Mobile TeleSystems OJSC ("MTS") is the leading telecommunications group in Russia, Eastern Europe and Central Asia, offering mobile and fixed voice, broadband, pay TV as well as content and entertainment services in one of the world's fastest growing regions. Including ...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:10,460
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Airtel Uganda

Airtel Uganda

-
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
MTS Group

MTS Group

-
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)

No incidents recorded for Airtel Uganda in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for MTS Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Airtel Uganda (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Airtel Uganda cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - MTS Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

MTS Group 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...
Airtel Uganda

Airtel Uganda

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
AIR131121222
MTS Group

MTS Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-48777
SUMMARY

FileBrowser Quantum is a free, self-hosted, web-based file manager. Versions prior to 1.3.2-stable, 1.4.0-beta and 1.4.1-beta are vulnerable to Path Traversal through the publicPatchHandler in backend/http/public.go which joins user-controlled fromPath and toPath body fields with the trusted d.share.Path BEFORE the downstream sanitizer runs. Because filepath.Join collapses .. segments during the join, the sanitizer in resourcePatchHandler never sees the traversal and the move/copy/rename operates on a path outside the shared directory. The same root-cause pattern was patched for the bulk DELETE endpoint as CVE-2026-44542 (GHSA-fwj3-42wh-8673), but the PATCH handler with the identical pattern was not updated. A public share link with AllowModify=true is sufficient to exploit this. Anyone holding such a link can move, copy, or rename arbitrary files within the share owner's source root. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.3.3-stable and 1.4.2-beta.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47750
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the GLOBAL opcode handler. The issue was caused by missing validation when searching for newline-delimited fields. A crafted .ckpt file without the expected newline could cause the parser to use -1 as a copy length, resulting in immediate heap corruption. The attack requires the victim or application to load a .ckpt file from an untrusted source, such as a downloaded model from a model sharing site. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by following these instructions: do not load .ckpt checkpoint files from untrusted sources, and prefer trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-47747
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the BINUNICODE opcode handler. The issue was caused by sign confusion on the opcode length field. A crafted .ckpt file could trigger memcpy with a very large length derived from a negative signed value, causing immediate heap corruption. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by only loading .ckpt checkpoint files from trusted sources and preferring trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-46448
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Nova before 33.0.2, the server create API does not strip certain hint data. The resulting instance has no Placement allocation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-22313
SUMMARY

The device has a webserver that exposes a REST API authenticated with a token on the management network. By exploiting an OS command injection vulnerability an authenticated attacker can send arbitrary commands to the device that are executed with administrative permissions by the underlying operating system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3