Comparison Overview
Cifas for Public Sector

Cifas for Public Sector
London, WC1H 9LT, GB
Last Update: 23/05/2026
We (Cifas), the leaders in fraud prevention, are offering our unparalleled insight into fraud and existing relationships with law enforcement to local authorities in the hope to make create a collaborative working relationship to prevent fraud. This year, we will be ru...

The Citco Group Limited
89 Nexus Way, 2nd Floor Camana Bay,, Grand Cayman, KY1-1205, KY
Last Update: 13/09/2026
Our heritage, since founding a civil law notary practice in the 1940s to establishing the Curacao International Trust Company in the 1960s, is built on challenging paradigms and delivering exceptional service within the financial and professional services industry. Toda...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Cifas for Public Sector







The Citco Group Limited






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Cifas for Public Sector in 2026.
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for The Citco Group Limited in 2026.
Incident History - Cifas for Public Sector (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Cifas for Public Sector cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - The Citco Group Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)
The Citco Group Limited cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Cifas for Public Sector

The Citco Group Limited
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.