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

Comparison Overview

CegedimCegedim
VS
GFT TechnologiesGFT Technologies
Cegedim

Cegedim

137, Rue d'aguesseau, Boulogne-Billancourt, 92100, FR

Last Update: 28/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.cegedim.com
748/1000Moderate

Founded in 1969, Cegedim is an innovative technology and services company in the field of digital data flow management for healthcare ecosystems and B2B, and a business software publisher for healthcare and insurance professionals. Cegedim employs 6,700 people in more t...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:4,059
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
GFT Technologies

GFT Technologies

Schelmenwasenstr. 34, Stuttgart, 70567, DE

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.gft.com
751/1000Fair

GFT Technologies is an AI-centric global digital transformation company. We design advanced data and AI transformation solutions, modernize technology architectures and develop next-generation core systems for industry leaders in Banking, Insurance, Manufacturing and Ro...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:13,147
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Cegedim

Cegedim

-
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
GFT Technologies

GFT Technologies

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cegedim in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for GFT Technologies in 2026.

Incidents

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

Cegedim cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - GFT Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

GFT Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Cegedim

Cegedim

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
GFT Technologies

GFT Technologies

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-91201
SUMMARY

DocsGPT through 0.20.0 posts OAuth connector session tokens to a wildcard target origin in the callback-status endpoint without validating sender origin. Attackers can obtain session tokens and provider account emails by acting as window.opener during OAuth authorization, then use tokens to disconnect victims' cloud storage connectors.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/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
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-91200
SUMMARY

DevSpace through 6.3.21 fails to reject parent-directory segments in tar entry names from the in-pod sync stream. Attackers operating a malicious container can stream tar entries with traversal sequences to write arbitrary files on the developer workstation, enabling code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-91199
SUMMARY

Refly through 1.1.0 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in the POST /v1/misc/scrape endpoint that fetches caller-supplied URLs without validating the scheme, host, or resolved address. Authenticated attackers can make the backend issue requests to loopback, private, and link-local addresses including cloud metadata services to read page titles and descriptions of internal resources.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/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
3.1
CVE-2026-91198
SUMMARY

GrowthBook through 5.0.1 returns unredacted fact table definitions including raw warehouse SQL in payloads served by unauthenticated public report and experiment endpoints. Attackers with knowledge of a publicly shared report or experiment identifier can read internal data warehouse query text, schema, table names, filter values and datasource identifiers.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
3.9
CVE-2026-91197
SUMMARY

Flowable flowable-engine through 8.0.0 contains an XML external entity injection vulnerability in ProcessDiagramLayoutFactory.parseXml() that fails to disable external entity resolution when parsing deployed BPMN resources. Attackers with process deployment privileges can embed DOCTYPE declarations with external entities in BPMN files to read arbitrary local files or trigger requests to internal network endpoints when diagram layout is computed.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-14
UPDATED
Date2026-09-14
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:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8