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

Comparison Overview

ATL Insurance GroupATL Insurance Group
VS
Swiss ReSwiss Re
ATL Insurance Group

ATL Insurance Group

643 MacGregor St, Upper Mount Gravatt, 4122, AU

Last Update: 27/02/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://atlinsurance.com.au/
749/1000Moderate

With over 15 years of experience, ATL Insurance Group is a niche transport operator underwriting agency, delivering comprehensive Heavy Motor Transport insurance solutions and expertise. We partner with brokers to ensure transport operators receive the best coverage and...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:22
Subsidiaries:27
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Swiss Re

Swiss Re

Mythenquai 50/60, Zurich, 8022, CH

Last Update: 04/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.swissre.com
811/1000Good

The Swiss Re Group is a leading wholesale provider of reinsurance, insurance and other insurance-based forms of risk transfer. Dealing direct and working through brokers, its global client base consists of insurance companies, mid-to-large-sized corporations and public ...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:15,154
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ATL Insurance Group

ATL Insurance Group

-
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
Swiss Re

Swiss Re

-
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 Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ATL Insurance Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Swiss Re in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - ATL Insurance Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ATL Insurance Group 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 - Swiss Re (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Swiss Re 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...
ATL Insurance Group

ATL Insurance Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Swiss Re

Swiss Re

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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