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

Comparison Overview

CaduceumCaduceum
VS
ConduentConduent
Caduceum

Caduceum

51, Rue des Docks, Lyon, 69009, FR

Last Update: 01/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.caduceum.fr
754/1000Fair

Caduceum : L’expert 100% santé pour accélérer vos projets industriels Depuis 2013, Caduceum s’impose comme LE partenaire de référence pour les acteurs des industries de la santé. Filiale spécialisée Life Sciences du groupe ALTEN, nous accompagnons les industriels pharm...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:315
Subsidiaries:38
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Conduent

Conduent

100 Campus Dr, Florham Park, New Jersey, US, 07932

Last Update: 21/04/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
https://www.conduent.com
100/1000Critical

Conduent delivers digital business solutions and services spanning the commercial, government and transportation spectrum – creating valuable outcomes for its clients and the millions of people who count on them. We leverage cloud computing, artificial intelligence, mac...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:37,668
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
6
Known data breaches
7
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Caduceum

Caduceum

-
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
Conduent

Conduent

-
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 Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Caduceum in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Conduent has 450.46% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Caduceum (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Caduceum 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 - Conduent (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Conduent 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...
Caduceum

Caduceum

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Conduent

Conduent

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
CON1776790111
🔒 Incident : Breach
CON1772670434
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
APP1770616335

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-11466
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in zilliztech deep-searcher up to 0.0.2. This affects the function CollectionRouter.invoke of the file deepsearcher/agent/collection_router.py. This manipulation of the argument kwargs causes improper access controls. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:N/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-11465
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in songquanpeng one-api up to 0.6.11-preview.7. Affected by this issue is the function Redeem of the file model/redemption.go of the component Redemption Code Top-Up Endpoint. The manipulation results in business logic errors. The attack may be launched remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.1)
CVSS2
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-11464
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in JeecgBoot up to 3.9.2. Affected by this vulnerability is the function queryPageList of the file src\main\java\org\jeecg\modules\system\controller\SysUserController.java of the component User List Endpoint. The manipulation of the argument salt leads to information disclosure. The attack may be initiated remotely. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. A fix is planned for the upcoming release.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.1)
CVSS2
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:S/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-11463
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in USCiLab Cereal up to 1.3.2. Affected is an unknown function of the component Shared Pointer Handler. Executing a manipulation can lead to type confusion. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-11462
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Chengdu Everbrite Network Technology BeikeShop up to 1.6.0.22. This impacts the function callback of the file plugins/Stripe/Controllers/StripeController.php of the component Stripe Plugin. Performing a manipulation of the argument Request results in improper authorization. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The patch is named 6719e0fc690ea0a998452092862e0f0a17c65968. It is suggested to install a patch to address this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9