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

Comparison Overview

ClientPayClientPay
VS
Principal Financial GroupPrincipal Financial Group
ClientPay

ClientPay

3700 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Austin, Texas, 78746, US

Last Update: 05/05/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.clientpay.com
754/1000Fair

ClientPay is a simple, web-based solution designed specifically for architecture, engineering, design, and construction professionals. ClientPay gives you the power to securely accept credit card and eCheck payments from anywhere—in your office, online, even at a projec...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:0
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Principal Financial Group

Principal Financial Group

711 High St., Des Moines, Iowa, US, 50309

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.principal.com
706/1000Moderate

Principal Financial Group® is dedicated to improving the wealth and well-being of people and businesses around the world—helping more than 62M customers plan, protect, invest, and retire as of December 31, 2023. Along the way, we commit to supporting the communities whe...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:23,891
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ClientPay

ClientPay

-
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
Principal Financial Group

Principal Financial Group

-
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 ClientPay in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Principal Financial Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - ClientPay (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ClientPay cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Principal Financial Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Principal Financial Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
ClientPay

ClientPay

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Principal Financial Group

Principal Financial Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
PRI131072625
🔒 Incident : Breach
PRI956091725
🔒 Incident : Breach
PRI1009091725

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-84483
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo through commit 9c39d8c8 contains an incomplete authentication bypass in encryptPass.json.php that allows unauthenticated attackers to compute valid HMAC tokens using the public site URL and current time. Attackers can forge authentication tokens by computing hash_hmac with the site's base URL as the key and submit arbitrary passwords to receive encrypted hashes, enabling offline precomputation attacks against stolen password databases.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-84482
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo through commit 9c39d8c8 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the get_domain() and isSameDomain() functions that fail to properly validate referer origins. Attackers can forge requests from sibling subdomains or unparseable long-gTLD origins to perform administrative ObjectYPT writes including live server configuration changes.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-84481
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo through 30.0 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MobileManager plugin getConfiguration endpoint that returns sensitive configuration data to unauthenticated visitors. Attackers can send an unauthenticated GET request to plugin/MobileManager/getConfiguration.json.php to obtain TLS private key file paths, socket configuration details, platform version, and debug flags enabling further targeted attacks.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-84480
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo fails to validate password recovery token expiration in userRecoverPassSave.json.php, allowing attackers to use expired tokens to reset account passwords indefinitely. Attackers who obtain a recovery token can use it at any time to change the target account's password and gain full account access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-84479
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo (current e01e41ecc and earlier) makes three login-time security controls depend solely on the client-supplied User-Agent header. The isAVideoEncoder()/isAVideoMobileApp() checks match HTTP_USER_AGENT against a hardcoded literal ("AVideoEncoder"/"AVideoMobileApp") with no IP check or shared secret. An attacker who submits valid credentials and sets User-Agent: AVideoEncoder bypasses two-factor authentication, skips brute-force captcha escalation, and avoids being recorded in the login/device audit history. No patch is available at the time of publication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9