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

Comparison Overview

Allianz in DeutschlandAllianz in Deutschland
VS
Munich ReMunich Re
Allianz in Deutschland

Allianz in Deutschland

Dieselstraße 11, Unterföhring, 85774, DE

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
763/1000Fair

Herzlich Willkommen auf unserem Profil! Als weltweit führender Versicherer, Finanzdienstleister und Vermögensverwalter stehen wir seit 1890 für Sicherheit und Zuversicht. Knapp 157.000 Mitarbeitende aus über 70 Ländern kümmern sich um 125 Millionen Privat- und Firmenku...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:5,953
Subsidiaries:130
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Munich Re

Munich Re

Königinstrasse 107, Munich, 80802, DE

Last Update: 04/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.munichre.com
809/1000Good

Munich Re is one of the world’s leading providers of reinsurance, primary insurance and insurance-related risk solutions. The group consists of the reinsurance and ERGO business segments, as well as the capital investment company MEAG. We are globally active and operate...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:15,187
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Allianz in Deutschland

Allianz in Deutschland

-
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
Munich Re

Munich Re

-
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 Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Allianz in Deutschland in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

Munich Re has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Allianz in Deutschland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Allianz in Deutschland cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Munich Re (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Munich Re 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...
Allianz in Deutschland

Allianz in Deutschland

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Munich Re

Munich Re

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MUN1786568796

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8