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

Comparison Overview

ALTEN AustriaALTEN Austria
VS
CognizantCognizant
ALTEN Austria

ALTEN Austria

Liebenauer Hauptstraße 246, Graz, Steiermark, 8041, AT

Last Update: 27/01/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.alten.at/
749/1000Moderate

Mit weltweit über 54,100 Mitarbeitern und Niederlassungen in über 30 Ländern ist die ALTEN Group einer der führenden Entwicklungsdienstleister in Europa. Auch in Österreich ist die ALTEN Group ein starker Technologiepartner auf Wachstumskurs. Mit langjähriger Erfahrung...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:33
Subsidiaries:38
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Cognizant

Cognizant

300 Frank W Burr Blvd, Teaneck, 07666, US

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
https://www.cognizant.ai
572/1000Very Poor

Cognizant (Nasdaq: CTSH) is an AI Builder and technology services provider, bridging the gap between AI investment and enterprise value. We build full-stack AI solutions powered by deep industry, process and engineering expertise — embedding an organization's unique co...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:369,020
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ALTEN Austria

ALTEN Austria

-
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
Cognizant

Cognizant

-
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 Austria in 2026.

Incidents

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

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

Incidents

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

ALTEN Austria 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 - Cognizant (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cognizant 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 Austria

ALTEN Austria

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Cognizant

Cognizant

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
COG1787432998
🔒 Incident : Breach
OCHCOGTRI1772814516
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
COGVERRUB1770942636

FAQ

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