Comparison Overview
Brown & Brown

Brown & Brown
N/A
Last Update: 03/02/2026
At Brown & Brown, our guiding principles include building our team with the highest quality people and delivering innovative solutions and superior service. If you are a highly complex multinational company, an individual or anything in between, our experienced teams ca...

Intact
700 University Avenue, Toronto, M5G 0A1, CA
Last Update: 06/09/2026
We created a purpose-driven company based on Values and a belief that insurance is about people, not things. This is the foundation on which we have built Intact and it lives every day through our purpose, Values, what we aim to achieve and how. ___ Nous sommes là pour...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Brown & Brown







Intact






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Brown & Brown in 2026.
Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Intact in 2026.
Incident History - Brown & Brown (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Brown & Brown cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Intact (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Intact cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Brown & Brown

Intact
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
A vulnerability was identified in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. Affected is the function formWlEncrypt of the file /boafrm/formWlEncrypt. The manipulation of the argument submit-url leads to buffer overflow. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.
A vulnerability was determined in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This impacts the function formWlAc of the file /boafrm/formWlAc. Executing a manipulation of the argument submit-url can lead to buffer overflow. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.
A flaw was found in the OpenShift console. Unauthenticated access to the `/api/devfile/` and `/api/devfile/samples/` endpoints allows a remote attacker to send crafted devfile payloads. This can lead to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), where the console pod makes requests to internal services and reflects partial responses to the attacker. Additionally, by sending repeated large requests without a specified content length, an attacker can cause unbounded memory growth, leading to a Denial of Service (DoS).
In Vinyl Cache before 9.0,2, workspace buffer overflow vulnerability was found in the .upper() and .lower() string type methods of VCL. This can be used as a remote denial of service (DoS) vector to make the child process segfault or assert, and then restart. Effectively exploiting this vulnerability requires prior knowledge about the VCL in use and the ability to craft a request that contains a string that is long enough to fill the remaining workspace at the call site while staying under the different request size limits (http_req_size, http_req_hdr_len, etc.).
A vulnerability was found in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This affects the function formSchedule of the file /boafrm/formSchedule. Performing a manipulation of the argument webpage results in buffer overflow. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used.