Comparison Overview
Clearstream

Clearstream
42 Avenue JF Kennedy, Luxembourg, undefined, 1855, LU
Last Update: 19/02/2026
Clearstream is a leading European supplier of post-trading services. The wholly owned subsidiary of Deutsche Börse ensures that cash and securities are promptly and effectively delivered between trading parties. It also manages, safekeeps and administers the securities ...

Bajaj Finserv
Bajaj Finserv House, Sakore Nagar Rd, Viman Nagar, Pune, 411014, IN
Last Update: 13/09/2026
Founded in April 2007, Bajaj Finserv is the financial arm of the Bajaj group. We believe in a simple philosophy to never settle for good and go for great. This reflects in our extensive product portfolio that spans across 3 broad categories- lending, insurance and wealt...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Clearstream







Bajaj Finserv






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

Clearstream

Bajaj Finserv
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.
The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.
The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.
With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.
The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.