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

Comparison Overview

BigBox VRBigBox VR
VS
The Walt Disney CompanyThe Walt Disney Company
BigBox VR

BigBox VR

Seattle, WA, US, 98122

Last Update: 13/03/2026

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

BigBox VR’s mission is to combine platform-defining games, social communities, and competitive play to create a VR esport ecosystem. It was founded in Seattle by game industry entrepreneurs who led successful exits and launched top-grossing live service products at Valv...

NAICS:71
NAICS Definition:Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Employees:27
Subsidiaries:21
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
The Walt Disney Company

The Walt Disney Company

The Walt Disney Company, Burbank, 91521, US

Last Update: 03/06/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.disneycareers.com
663/1000Weak

The Walt Disney Company, together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, is a leading diversified international family entertainment and media enterprise that includes three core business segments: Disney Entertainment, ESPN, and Disney Experiences. Our mission is to en...

NAICS:71
NAICS Definition:Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Employees:183,295
Subsidiaries:57
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
BigBox VR

BigBox VR

-
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
The Walt Disney Company

The Walt Disney Company

-
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 Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BigBox VR in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The Walt Disney Company in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - BigBox VR (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BigBox VR cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - The Walt Disney Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Walt Disney Company 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...
BigBox VR

BigBox VR

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
The Walt Disney Company

The Walt Disney Company

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
TOYTHEFED1773051888
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
HIT2032020092925
🔒 Incident : Breach
THE409030225

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8