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

Comparison Overview

ATLAS REPLYATLAS REPLY
VS
NeobpoNeobpo
ATLAS REPLY

ATLAS REPLY

CORSO FRANCIA 110, TORINO, 10143, IT

Last Update: 20/12/2025

View Profile
750/1000Fair

Atlas Reply is the company of the Reply group with a consolidated experience in IT Governance that is focused on everything related to processes, practices and solutions aimed at maximizing the effectiveness, efficiency and productivity of IT resources, supporting the d...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:46
Subsidiaries:124
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Neobpo

Neobpo

Rua Pais Leme, 14, São Paulo, SP, BR, 05424-010

Last Update: 04/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.neobpo
771/1000Fair

Somos especializados em integrar tecnologia com inteligência humana, oferecendo soluções digitais que promovem transformação e eficiência operacional. Nosso foco é gerar valor por meio de resultados reais, utilizando inteligência digital para atender às necessidades esp...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:10,245
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ATLAS REPLY

ATLAS REPLY

-
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
Neobpo

Neobpo

-
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 ATLAS REPLY in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Neobpo in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - ATLAS REPLY (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ATLAS REPLY 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 - Neobpo (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Neobpo 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...
ATLAS REPLY

ATLAS REPLY

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Neobpo

Neobpo

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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