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

Comparison Overview

AT&T Public SectorAT&T Public Sector
VS
Safaricom PLCSafaricom PLC
AT&T Public Sector

AT&T Public Sector

Washington, 20001, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
750/1000Fair

No company is more invested in America’s future than AT&T. We’re investing billions into the economy, providing quality jobs to over 200,000 people in the U.S. alone. We’re supporting the veterans who make our country stronger and providing disaster relief support to th...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:4
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Safaricom PLC

Safaricom PLC

Waiyaki Way, Westlands, Nairobi, P.O. Box 66827, 00800, Nairobi , KE

Last Update: 13/09/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://safaricom.co.ke/
728/1000Moderate

Safaricom is the leading provider of converged communication solutions in Kenya. In addition to providing a broad range of first-class products and services for Telephony, Broadband Internet and Financial services, Safaricom seeks to uplift the welfare of Kenyans throug...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:17,457
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AT&T Public Sector

AT&T Public Sector

-
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
Safaricom PLC

Safaricom PLC

-
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 Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AT&T Public Sector in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

Safaricom PLC has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - AT&T Public Sector (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AT&T Public Sector cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Safaricom PLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Safaricom PLC 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...
AT&T Public Sector

AT&T Public Sector

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Safaricom PLC

Safaricom PLC

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
SAF1786084206
🔒 Incident : Breach
SAF1779179446

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA