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

Comparison Overview

CATIACATIA
VS
Pitney BowesPitney Bowes
CATIA

CATIA

10 rue Marcel Dassault, Vélizy-Villacoublay, 78140, FR

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.catia.com
749/1000Moderate

CATIA is Dassault Systèmes'​ Pioneer Brand. It is the World's Leading Solution for Product Design and Innovation.

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:1
Subsidiaries:29
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Pitney Bowes

Pitney Bowes

27 Waterview Dr, Shelton, 06484, US

Last Update: 15/09/2026

View Profile
499/1000Critical

Pitney Bowes is a technology-driven company that provides digital shipping solutions, mailing innovation, and financial services to clients around the world – including more than 90 percent of the Fortune 500. Small businesses to large enterprises, and government entiti...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:12,782
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
CATIA

CATIA

-
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
Pitney Bowes

Pitney Bowes

-
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 Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CATIA in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Pitney Bowes has 194.12% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

CATIA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Pitney Bowes (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pitney Bowes 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...
CATIA

CATIA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Pitney Bowes

Pitney Bowes

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
INDPITCARBASZARHAL1777466463
🔒 Incident : Breach
PIT1777335822
🔒 Incident : Breach
CARHOLPRI1776630318

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-95828
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in Mstfakts College-Management-System. This affects the function session_start of the file Front-end/server.php of the component Authentication. Executing a manipulation can lead to session fixiation. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product takes the approach of rolling releases to provide continious delivery. Therefore, version details for affected and updated releases are not available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
2.8
CVE-2026-95820
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in anirbandutta9 College-Notes-Gallery up to 8c1cf3d98f30982d069c88ca172612c001eb39f6. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /dashboard/userprofile.php?section=admin1. Performing a manipulation of the argument image results in unrestricted upload. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. This product is using a rolling release to provide continious delivery. Therefore, no version details for affected nor updated releases are available. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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: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
2.8
CVE-2026-61685
SUMMARY

ReactPress is a publishing system for React developers. Prior to version 3.7.0, ReactPress API list endpoints build TypeORM `QueryBuilder` conditions using unsanitized HTTP query parameter names as SQL column identifiers (e.g. `` `article.${key}` ``). TypeORM parameterizes values but not column names, allowing unauthenticated attackers to inject SQL through crafted query string keys. Version 3.7.0 contains a patch. As a workaround, allowlist allowed filter column names before interpolating into SQL.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-57576
SUMMARY

plone.app.dexterity is a content-type system for the Plone content management system, and plone.app.contenttypes provides Plone’s Dexterity-based content types. Plone.app.dexterity versions through 3.2.2, 4.0.0 through 4.1.2, and 5.0.0, and plone.app.contenttypes versions through 3.0.11, 4.0.0 through 4.0.9, and 5.0.0 are vulnerable to denial of service because an authenticated user can create content with excessively long titles, descriptions, or uploaded-file names, causing Plone to become unresponsive and potentially making the resulting content difficult to edit or delete. The vulnerability is patched in plone.app.dexterity versions 3.2.3, 4.1.3, and 5.0.1, and in plone.app.contenttypes versions 3.0.12, 4.0.10, and 5.0.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-18176
SUMMARY

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8