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

Comparison Overview

AnkamaAnkama
VS
Six Flags Entertainment CorporationSix Flags Entertainment Corporation
Ankama

Ankama

75 bd d'Armentieres, Roubaix, 59100, FR

Last Update: 30/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://www.ankama.com/fr
683/1000Weak

At Ankama, we are all about Transmedia and games! Ankama is a French game company and video games developer and publisher, leader in the interactive entertainment and online media industry that builds its development around a transmedia strategy: online games, games fo...

NAICS:71
NAICS Definition:Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Employees:479
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Six Flags Entertainment Corporation

Six Flags Entertainment Corporation

1000 Ballpark Way, Arlington, 76011, US

Last Update: 04/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://sixflags.com
781/1000Fair

Welcome to Six Flags Entertainment Corporation! We are North America’s largest regional amusement-resort operator, with 20 amusement parks, 14 water parks and 9 resort properties across 13 states in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. The Company also manages an amusement pa...

NAICS:71
NAICS Definition:Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Employees:23,025
Subsidiaries:32
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Ankama

Ankama

-
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
Six Flags Entertainment Corporation

Six Flags Entertainment Corporation

-
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 Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)

Ankama has 48.45% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Six Flags Entertainment Corporation in 2026.

Incidents

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

Ankama cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Six Flags Entertainment Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Six Flags Entertainment Corporation 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...
Ankama

Ankama

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ANK1777566230
Six Flags Entertainment Corporation

Six Flags Entertainment Corporation

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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