Comparison Overview

Bell

VS

Rogers Communications

Bell

1 carrefour Alexandre-Graham-Bell, Montreal, Quebec, CA, H3E 3B3
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 750 and 799

We advance how people connect with each other and the world #ConnectionIsEverything. Bell is Canada's largest communications company providing advanced Bell broadband wireless, Internet, TV, media and business communications services. Founded in Montréal in 1880, Bell is wholly owned by BCE Inc. To learn more, please visit Bell.ca or BCE.ca Through Bell for Better, we are investing to create a better today and a better tomorrow by supporting the social and economic prosperity of our communities. This includes the Bell Let's Talk initiative, which promotes Canadian mental health with national awareness and anti-stigma campaigns like Bell Let's Talk Day and significant Bell funding of community care and access, research and workplace initiatives throughout the country. To learn more, please visit Bell.ca/LetsTalk

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 33,541
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Rogers Communications

333 Bloor Street East, Toronto, Ontario, CA, M4W 1G9
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Rogers is Canada’s communications and entertainment company, driven to connect and entertain Canadians. For more information, please visit rogers.com or investors.rogers.com. Déterminée à connecter et à divertir les Canadiens et Canadiennes, Rogers est la référence canadienne en matière de communications et de divertissement. Pour en savoir plus, visitez rogers.com ou investisseurs.rogers.com. This LinkedIn company page is moderated. For more info, please review our commenting policy here: http://roge.rs/2ofPXLN

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 28,387
Subsidiaries: 10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bell.jpeg
Bell
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rogers-communications.jpeg
Rogers Communications
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Bell
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Rogers Communications
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bell in 2025.

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rogers Communications in 2025.

Incident History — Bell (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bell cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Rogers Communications (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rogers Communications cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bell.jpeg
Bell
Incidents

Date Detected: 01/2018
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 05/2017
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rogers-communications.jpeg
Rogers Communications
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Rogers Communications company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Bell company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Bell company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Rogers Communications company has not reported any.

In the current year, Rogers Communications company and Bell company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Rogers Communications company nor Bell company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Bell company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Rogers Communications company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Rogers Communications company nor Bell company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Bell company nor Rogers Communications company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Bell nor Rogers Communications holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Rogers Communications company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Bell company.

Bell company employs more people globally than Rogers Communications company, reflecting its scale as a Telecommunications.

Neither Bell nor Rogers Communications holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Bell nor Rogers Communications holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Bell nor Rogers Communications holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Bell nor Rogers Communications holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Bell nor Rogers Communications holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Bell nor Rogers Communications holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H