Comparison Overview

BNY

VS

Citi

BNY

240 Greenwich St, New York, NY, 10286, US
Last Update: 2025-12-09
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.bny.com

We help make money work for the world — managing it, moving it and keeping it safe. As a leading global financial services company at the center of the world’s financial system, we touch nearly 20% of the world’s investable assets. Today we help over 90% of Fortune 100 companies and nearly all the top 100 banks globally access the money they need. For more than 240 years we have partnered alongside our clients to create solutions that benefit businesses, communities and people everywhere. Follow BNY on Instagram & X: @BNYglobal

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 55,698
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Citi

388 Greenwich Street, New York, New York, US, 10013
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 800 and 849
http://www.citigroup.com

Citi's mission is to serve as a trusted partner to our clients by responsibly providing financial services that enable growth and economic progress. Our core activities are safeguarding assets, lending money, making payments and accessing the capital markets on behalf of our clients. We have over 200 years of experience helping our clients meet the world's toughest challenges and embrace its greatest opportunities. We are Citi, the global bank – an institution connecting millions of people across hundreds of countries and cities. For information on Citi’s commitment to privacy, visit on.citi/privacy.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 197,159
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bny-mellon.jpeg
BNY
—
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/citi.jpeg
Citi
—
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
BNY
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Citi
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BNY in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Citi in 2025.

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

BNY cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Citi cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bny-mellon.jpeg
BNY
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/citi.jpeg
Citi
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2022
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Email
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 3/2013
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Accidental Exposure
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Citi company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas BNY company has not reported any.

In the current year, Citi company and BNY company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Citi company nor BNY company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Citi company has disclosed at least one data breach, while BNY company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Citi company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while BNY company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither BNY company nor Citi company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither BNY nor Citi holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

BNY company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Citi company.

Citi company employs more people globally than BNY company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither BNY nor Citi holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither BNY nor Citi holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither BNY nor Citi holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither BNY nor Citi holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither BNY nor Citi holds HIPAA certification.

Neither BNY nor Citi holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References