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

Comparison Overview

BBVA ResearchBBVA Research
VS
Los Alamos National LaboratoryLos Alamos National Laboratory
BBVA Research

BBVA Research

Calle de la Sauceda, Madrid, Community of Madrid, 28050, ES

Last Update: 28/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.bbvaresearch.com
761/1000Fair

BBVA Resarch aims to foster society’s knowledge on topics such as Banking, the Digital Economy and Geostrategy and stimulate public debate. Formerly known as the Research Service, BBVA Research it is currently headed by Jorge Sicilia, Chief Economist of the BBVA Group....

NAICS:5417
NAICS Definition:Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees:3,118
Subsidiaries:23
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Los Alamos National Laboratory

Los Alamos National Laboratory

P.O. Box 1663, Los Alamos, NM, US, 87545

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.lanl.gov/
776/1000Fair

Los Alamos National Laboratory is one of the world’s most innovative multidisciplinary research institutions. We're engaged in strategic science on behalf of national security to ensure the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile. Our workforce specializes ...

NAICS:5417
NAICS Definition:Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees:13,101
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
BBVA Research

BBVA Research

-
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
Los Alamos National Laboratory

Los Alamos National Laboratory

-
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 Research Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BBVA Research in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Research Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Los Alamos National Laboratory in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - BBVA Research (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BBVA Research 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 - Los Alamos National Laboratory (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Los Alamos National Laboratory 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...
BBVA Research

BBVA Research

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Los Alamos National Laboratory

Los Alamos National Laboratory

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2