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

Comparison Overview

autolinee toscaneautolinee toscane
VS
LyftLyft
autolinee toscane

autolinee toscane

Viale dei Mille, 115, Firenze, 50131, IT

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://at-bus.it
758/1000Fair

Dal 1° novembre 2021 gestiamo il trasporto pubblico locale su gomma della Regione Toscana. Ci occupiamo dell’integrazione, del monitoraggio e della gestione di oltre 950 linee, distribuite su 24 mila km di rete e percorse da 2.600 autobus che nei loro tragitti passano ...

NAICS:485
NAICS Definition:Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation
Employees:541
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Lyft

Lyft

185 Berry Street, San Francisco, CA, US, 94107

Last Update: 30/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.lyft.com/
737/1000Moderate

Whether it’s an everyday commute or a journey that changes everything, Lyft is driven by our purpose: to serve and connect. In 2012, Lyft was founded as one of the first ridesharing communities in the United States. Now, millions of drivers have chosen to earn on billio...

NAICS:485
NAICS Definition:Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation
Employees:27,444
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
autolinee toscane

autolinee toscane

-
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
Lyft

Lyft

-
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 Ground Passenger Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for autolinee toscane in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Ground Passenger Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

Lyft has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - autolinee toscane (X = Date, Y = Severity)

autolinee toscane cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Lyft (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lyft 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...
autolinee toscane

autolinee toscane

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Lyft

Lyft

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
ELFTEMCOUGRUAMASAMLYF1777580773

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-85893
SUMMARY

Use after free in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-69486
SUMMARY

Heap-based buffer overflow in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2025-11395
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Podman. If an attacker can pass a crafted tar archive to the `podman load` command, they can create files on the host machine with the privileges of the user running Podman.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-92259
SUMMARY

Integer overflow or wraparound vulnerability in Samsung Opensource Escargot allows attackers with write access to the bytecode-cache directory to cause a heap-based buffer overflow and denial of service via a crafted cache file. This issue affects Escargot: ac94df78493ee6fede286620d94f724e46b4d238.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-92257
SUMMARY

Netcore NR255-V version 1.5.130703 contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in L7 content management pages that use eval() sinks, affecting the call board text and policy group handling components. Attackers can inject persistent script payloads through these pages to have malicious code executed in the context of other users viewing the affected content.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3