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

Comparison Overview

BAWAG GroupBAWAG Group
VS
SantanderSantander
BAWAG Group

BAWAG Group

Wiedner Gürtel 11, Vienna, 1100, AT

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.bawaggroup.com/
784/1000Fair

BAWAG Group AG is a publicly listed holding company headquartered in Vienna, Austria, serving our over 4 million retail, small business, corporate, real estate and public sector customers across Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Netherlands, Ireland, the United Kingdom, an...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:1,849
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Santander

Santander

Avenida de Cantabria S/N, Boadilla del Monte, 28660, ES

Last Update: 20/05/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://www.santander.com
662/1000Weak

Banco Santander (SAN SM, STD US, BNC LN) is a leading commercial bank, founded in 1857 and headquartered in Spain and one of the largest banks in the world by market capitalization. The group’s activities are consolidated into five global businesses: Retail & Commercial...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:141,634
Subsidiaries:24
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
BAWAG Group

BAWAG 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
Santander

Santander

-
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 Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BAWAG Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

Santander has 88.68% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

BAWAG 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 - Santander (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Santander 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...
BAWAG Group

BAWAG Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Santander

Santander

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
METORATICBANYAHATTADOAPPCOLGOO1777962591
🔒 Incident : Breach
BANSNOTIC1771979968
🔒 Incident : Breach
23A1764346412

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-49416
SUMMARY

The CONS_HISTORY ioctl handler did not adequately validate the requested history size. A large value caused an integer overflow in the buffer size calculation, resulting in a heap allocation smaller than expected. Subsequent initialization of the buffer wrote beyond the end of the allocation. An unprivileged local user with access to a vt(4) device can trigger an out-of-bounds write in the kernel, potentially escalating privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49414
SUMMARY

The ELF image activator cleared per-process ASLR preference flags for setuid binaries after the code that computes the PIE base address, rather than before. As a result, a user-requested ASLR disable was still in effect at the point where the base address was chosen. An unprivileged local user can disable ASLR for a setuid PIE binary by calling procctl(2) before execve(2). This makes exploitation of any separate memory corruption vulnerability in that binary significantly easier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49417
SUMMARY

Second, the audio buffer backing a mapping could be freed when the device was closed even though the mapping remained valid. The freed memory could then be reused elsewhere while still accessible through the stale mapping. The /dev/dsp device nodes are world-accessible by default. On a system with an audio device, either issue allows an unprivileged local user to read and write kernel memory, which can be used to escalate privileges, potentially gaining full control of the affected system. At a minimum, an attacker can crash the kernel, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49413
SUMMARY

The Linuxulator determined whether a binary was set-user-ID or set-group-ID by checking the P_SUGID process flag. During execve(2), this flag is not yet set at the point where the auxiliary vector is constructed, so AT_SECURE was incorrectly set to zero for set-user-ID and set-group-ID executables. An unprivileged local user can inject a shared library via LD_PRELOAD into a set-user-ID or set-group-ID Linux binary, gaining the privileges of that binary.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49412
SUMMARY

The kernel handler for IPV6_MSFILTER dropped a serializing lock in order to copy the source-filter list from userspace, then reacquired the lock. During this window another thread could free the multicast filter structure, leaving the handler with a stale pointer to freed memory. An unprivileged local user can exploit this use-after-free to escalate privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA