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

Comparison Overview

AQD by Comply365AQD by Comply365
VS
Red HatRed Hat
AQD by Comply365

AQD by Comply365

Wellington, NZ

Last Update: 29/11/2025

View Profile
753/1000Fair

AQD by Comply365 specialise in safety and risk management, working alongside highly regulated industries who keep people, products and information moving. Designed to capture vital safety, compliance and risk data in a consistent and connected way, AQD supports you to c...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Red Hat

Red Hat

100 E. Davie St., Raleigh, NC, US, 27601

Last Update: 19/06/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.redhat.com
688/1000Weak

Red Hat is the world’s leading provider of enterprise open source solutions, using a community-powered approach to deliver high-performing Linux, hybrid cloud, edge, and Kubernetes technologies. We hire creative, passionate people who are ready to contribute their idea...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:19,335
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AQD by Comply365

AQD by Comply365

-
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
Red Hat

Red Hat

-
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 Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AQD by Comply365 in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Red Hat in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - AQD by Comply365 (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AQD by Comply365 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 - Red Hat (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Red Hat 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...
AQD by Comply365

AQD by Comply365

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Red Hat

Red Hat

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
RED4732847100725
🔒 Incident : Breach
RED4292342100825
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
RED1694016100125

FAQ

Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between AQD by Comply365 company and Red Hat company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between AQD by Comply365 and Red Hat, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between AQD by Comply365 and Red Hat, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - AQD by Comply365 or Red Hat ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - AQD by Comply365 or Red Hat ?
Between AQD by Comply365 and Red Hat, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between AQD by Comply365 and Red Hat, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-49416
SUMMARY

The CONS_HISTORY ioctl handler did not adequately validate the requested history size. A large value caused an integer overflow in the buffer size calculation, resulting in a heap allocation smaller than expected. Subsequent initialization of the buffer wrote beyond the end of the allocation. An unprivileged local user with access to a vt(4) device can trigger an out-of-bounds write in the kernel, potentially escalating privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49414
SUMMARY

The ELF image activator cleared per-process ASLR preference flags for setuid binaries after the code that computes the PIE base address, rather than before. As a result, a user-requested ASLR disable was still in effect at the point where the base address was chosen. An unprivileged local user can disable ASLR for a setuid PIE binary by calling procctl(2) before execve(2). This makes exploitation of any separate memory corruption vulnerability in that binary significantly easier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49417
SUMMARY

Second, the audio buffer backing a mapping could be freed when the device was closed even though the mapping remained valid. The freed memory could then be reused elsewhere while still accessible through the stale mapping. The /dev/dsp device nodes are world-accessible by default. On a system with an audio device, either issue allows an unprivileged local user to read and write kernel memory, which can be used to escalate privileges, potentially gaining full control of the affected system. At a minimum, an attacker can crash the kernel, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49413
SUMMARY

The Linuxulator determined whether a binary was set-user-ID or set-group-ID by checking the P_SUGID process flag. During execve(2), this flag is not yet set at the point where the auxiliary vector is constructed, so AT_SECURE was incorrectly set to zero for set-user-ID and set-group-ID executables. An unprivileged local user can inject a shared library via LD_PRELOAD into a set-user-ID or set-group-ID Linux binary, gaining the privileges of that binary.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49412
SUMMARY

The kernel handler for IPV6_MSFILTER dropped a serializing lock in order to copy the source-filter list from userspace, then reacquired the lock. During this window another thread could free the multicast filter structure, leaving the handler with a stale pointer to freed memory. An unprivileged local user can exploit this use-after-free to escalate privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA