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

Comparison Overview

Andersen in the United KingdomAndersen in the United Kingdom
VS
SBI CardSBI Card
Andersen in the United Kingdom

Andersen in the United Kingdom

2 George Yard, London, EC3V 9DH, GB

Last Update: 10/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://uk.Andersen.com
753/1000Fair

Andersen in The United Kingdom provides a wide range of UK and US tax services to private clients and businesses, helping them achieve their personal and commercial objectives in a tax efficient manner. Located in London, the firm is a member of Andersen Global, an i...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:46
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
SBI Card

SBI Card

Infinity Tower, DLF City Phase 2, Gurgaon, 122002, IN

Last Update: 10/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.sbicard.com
776/1000Fair

SBI Card was launched in 1998 with the State Bank of India, India's largest bank, as the majority stakeholder. In March 2020, SBI Card was listed on BSE and NSE. Today, SBI Card is India’s largest pure-play credit card issuer with over 20 million cards in force, as of D...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:24,685
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Andersen in the United Kingdom

Andersen in the United Kingdom

-
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
SBI Card

SBI Card

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Andersen in the United Kingdom in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SBI Card in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Andersen in the United Kingdom (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Andersen in the United Kingdom 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 - SBI Card (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SBI Card 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...
Andersen in the United Kingdom

Andersen in the United Kingdom

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
SBI Card

SBI Card

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-110873
SUMMARY

Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/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
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110872
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-110871
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110870
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-110869
SUMMARY

Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9