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

Comparison Overview

CF BenchmarksCF Benchmarks
VS
Discovery LimitedDiscovery Limited
CF Benchmarks

CF Benchmarks

25 Copthall Avenue, London, England, EC2R 7BP, GB

Last Update: 23/05/2026

View Profile
752/1000Fair

CF Benchmarks is the leading provider of digital asset benchmarks. Our cryptocurrency indices power a wide range of financial products including derivative contracts, investment funds and structured products from leading financial institutions. Our indices power CME Gr...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:14
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Discovery Limited

Discovery Limited

1 Discovery Place, Sandhurst, Johannesburg, Gauteng, ZA, 2196

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.discovery.co.za
782/1000Fair

Imagine a world where people live healthier, more enhanced and protected lives… A world in which each organisation is a powerful influencer and responsible corporate citizen, committed to being a force for social good. As a leading innovator in healthcare, wellness, ins...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:14,501
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
CF Benchmarks

CF Benchmarks

-
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
Discovery Limited

Discovery Limited

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CF Benchmarks in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Discovery Limited in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - CF Benchmarks (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CF Benchmarks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Discovery Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Discovery Limited 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...
CF Benchmarks

CF Benchmarks

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Discovery Limited

Discovery Limited

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8