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

Comparison Overview

Asian Development Bank (ADB)Asian Development Bank (ADB)
VS
The World BankThe World Bank
Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Asian Development Bank (ADB)

6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong, 1550, PH

Last Update: 29/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.adb.org
716/1000Moderate

Working together with our partners, we help solve Asia and the Pacific’s most complex development challenges

NAICS:522293
NAICS Definition:International Trade Financing
Employees:8,215
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
The World Bank

The World Bank

1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC, US, 20433

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.worldbank.org
818/1000Good

The World Bank is a vital source of financial and technical assistance to developing countries around the world. Our vision is to create a world free of poverty on a livable planet. We are not a bank in the common sense; we are made up of two unique development institu...

NAICS:522293
NAICS Definition:International Trade Financing
Employees:44,796
Subsidiaries:23
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Asian Development Bank (ADB)

-
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
The World Bank

The World Bank

-
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 International Trade and Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Asian Development Bank (ADB) has 66.67% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs International Trade and Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The World Bank in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Asian Development Bank (ADB) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Asian Development Bank (ADB) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - The World Bank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The World Bank 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...
Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ASIALN1777487604
The World Bank

The World Bank

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
1.8