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

Comparison Overview

CJ OliveNetworksCJ OliveNetworks
VS
Iron MountainIron Mountain
CJ OliveNetworks

CJ OliveNetworks

용산구 한강대로 366 (동자동) , 서울특별시, 04323, KR

Last Update: 27/12/2025

View Profile
755/1000Fair

CJ올리브네트웍스는 1995년 창립이래 생활∙문화 기반의 종합 IT서비스를 성공적으로 제공함으로써 고객 만족과 가치를 실현하고 있으며, 고객의 신뢰와 지지를 바탕으로 견실하고 안정적인 성장을 지속해오고 있습니다. 지난 25여년 간 IT시스템 구축 및 서비스로 축적된 경험과 노하우를 바탕으로 CJ그룹의 디지털 전환(Digital Transformation)을 위한 계열사 디지털 혁신을 주도하고 있으며 스마트스토어, AI팩토리, 빅데이터, 블록체인 등 4차 산업혁명 시대에 경쟁력있...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:755
Subsidiaries:19
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Iron Mountain

Iron Mountain

33 Arch St, Boston, 02110, US

Last Update: 07/05/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.ironmountain.com
806/1000Good

In the era of AI, your data is your advantage. Yet too often it remains untapped: disconnected from systems, underutilized, untrained, and exposed to risk. Iron Mountain is the trusted partner for organizations of all sizes to unlock what’s possible, transforming inform...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:23,332
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
CJ OliveNetworks

CJ OliveNetworks

-
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
Iron Mountain

Iron Mountain

-
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 CJ OliveNetworks in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Iron Mountain in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - CJ OliveNetworks (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CJ OliveNetworks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Iron Mountain (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Iron Mountain 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...
CJ OliveNetworks

CJ OliveNetworks

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Iron Mountain

Iron Mountain

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9