Comparison Overview

China Telecom Global

VS

AT&T

China Telecom Global

28/F, Everbright Centre, 108 Gloucester Road, Wan Chai, Hong Kong, HK, 000000, HK
Last Update: 2025-11-24

About China Telecom Global Limited China Telecom Corporation Limited (“China Telecom”), one of the world’s largest providers of integrated telecommunication services, has been unwaveringly strived to enhance its capabilities in maintaining its global footprints while addressing changing demands. In 2000, China Telecom established its first overseas office. In order to further enhance its global service quality and accelerating overseas business expansion, China Telecom established China Telecom Global Limited in 2012, which is headquartered in Hong Kong, China. China Telecom has not only established its presence in 41 countries and regions, but also now offers services around the world to help global customers accelerate their business transformation journeys. Leveraging its vast network resources of 47 submarine cables with 74T in intercontinental capacity and 223 Points-of-Presence (PoPs) around the world, China Telecom offers a high-performing global network for international carriers, multinational enterprises and overseas Chinese customers. China Telecom delivers a wide portfolio of high quality, integrated communications solutions, including internet direct access, internet transit, data services, broadband, unified communications, internet data centres, cloud computing, ICT services, fixed-line and mobile services, multi-domestic MVNO and global IoT connectivity service, professional services, industry solutions, telecom operation consultancy and service outsourcing. With an agile and forward-looking spirit, innovative products and business models, and industry-leading technologies, China Telecom is dedicated to creating value for its customers in their business transformation, enabling them to achieve business growth, enhance global footprints and maintain competitive edges by digitalisation.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 675
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

AT&T

208 S. Akard Street, None, Dallas, TX, US, 75202
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 0 and 549

We understand that our customers want an easier, less complicated life. We’re using our network, labs, products, services, and people to create a world where everything works together seamlessly, and life is better as a result. How will we continue to drive for this excellence in innovation? With you. Our people, and their passion to succeed, are at the heart of what we do. Today, we’re poised to connect millions of people with their world, delivering the human benefits of technology in ways that defy the imaginable. What are you dreaming of doing with your career? Find stories about our talent, career advice, opportunities, company news, and innovations here on LinkedIn. To learn more about joining AT&T, visit: http://www.att.jobs We provide in some of our posts links to articles or posts from third-party websites unaffiliated with AT&T. In doing so, AT&T is not adopting, endorsing or otherwise approving the content of those articles or posts. AT&T is providing this content for your information only.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 177,538
Subsidiaries: 7
12-month incidents
5
Known data breaches
26
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/china-telecom-global.jpeg
China Telecom Global
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/att.jpeg
AT&T
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
China Telecom Global
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
AT&T
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for China Telecom Global in 2025.

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

AT&T has 747.46% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — China Telecom Global (X = Date, Y = Severity)

China Telecom Global cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — AT&T (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AT&T cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/china-telecom-global.jpeg
China Telecom Global
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/att.jpeg
AT&T
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Theft
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Data Theft
Blog: Blog

FAQ

China Telecom Global company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to AT&T company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

AT&T company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas China Telecom Global company has not reported any.

In the current year, AT&T company has reported more cyber incidents than China Telecom Global company.

AT&T company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while China Telecom Global company has not reported such incidents publicly.

AT&T company has disclosed at least one data breach, while China Telecom Global company has not reported such incidents publicly.

AT&T company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while China Telecom Global company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither China Telecom Global company nor AT&T company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither China Telecom Global nor AT&T holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

AT&T company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to China Telecom Global company.

AT&T company employs more people globally than China Telecom Global company, reflecting its scale as a Telecommunications.

Neither China Telecom Global nor AT&T holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither China Telecom Global nor AT&T holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither China Telecom Global nor AT&T holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither China Telecom Global nor AT&T holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither China Telecom Global nor AT&T holds HIPAA certification.

Neither China Telecom Global nor AT&T holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H