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

Comparison Overview

ALTEN KEPLER DivisionALTEN KEPLER Division
VS
FISFIS
ALTEN KEPLER Division

ALTEN KEPLER Division

Soseaua Pipera, Bucharest, 020309, RO

Last Update: 27/02/2026

View Profile

ALTEN KEPLER division is the IT division of ALTEN in Romania and offers software development services, business and technical analysis, support, maintenance and monitoring for national & international clients. 310 consultants from 3 cities (Bucharest, Pitesti, Craiova) ...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:1
Subsidiaries:38
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
FIS

FIS

601 Riverside Ave, Jacksonville, 32202, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.fisglobal.com/
799/1000Fair

Unlocking financial technology. Bringing the world’s money into harmony. At FIS, we advance the way the world pays, banks, and invests. With decades of expertise, we provide financial technology solutions to financial institutions, businesses, and developers. Headquart...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:52,457
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ALTEN KEPLER Division

ALTEN KEPLER Division

-
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
FIS

FIS

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ALTEN KEPLER Division in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FIS in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - ALTEN KEPLER Division (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ALTEN KEPLER Division cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

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

FIS 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...
ALTEN KEPLER Division

ALTEN KEPLER Division

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
FIS

FIS

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
FIS454072625

FAQ

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