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

Comparison Overview

Concept Reply USConcept Reply US
VS
MindtreeMindtree
Concept Reply US

Concept Reply US

37000 Woodward Ave, Suite 200, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, US, 48304

Last Update: 20/12/2025

View Profile
753/1000Fair

Concept Reply is a leader in IoT solutions. We support and advise our customers in Automotive, Manufacturing, Smart Infrastructure and beyond in all aspects of Internet of Things (IoT) and Cloud Computing. With a background in engineering and a passion for cutting-edge...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:28
Subsidiaries:119
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Mindtree

Mindtree

Bangalore, India - New Jersey, USA, Bangalore, 560059, IN

Last Update: 01/04/2026

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

LTIMindtree is a global technology consulting and digital solutions company that enables enterprises across industries to reimagine business models, accelerate innovation, and maximize growth by harnessing digital technologies. As a digital transformation partner to mor...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:20,000
Subsidiaries:14
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Concept Reply US

Concept Reply US

-
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
Mindtree

Mindtree

-
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 Information Technology & Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Concept Reply US in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Information Technology & Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mindtree in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Concept Reply US (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Concept Reply US 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 - Mindtree (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mindtree 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...
Concept Reply US

Concept Reply US

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Mindtree

Mindtree

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-83524
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in RedPort Optimizer wXa-203, Optimizer wXa-213 and Optimizer wXa-223 up to 20260704. This impacts the function exec of the file /xgatev1/system/datetime.php of the component System Clock. The manipulation leads to command injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-82971
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in QVidium Opera11 3.3.2a26-Ax4x-opera11. This affects an unknown part of the file /cgi-bin/net_tr.cgi of the component CGI Script. This manipulation of the argument ipaddr causes command injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor explains: "QVidium has now closed its doors and no longer will be able to sell products or provide support." This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS2
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-82957
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in hyperledger-firefly firefly up to 1.4.0. The impacted element is the function ValidateOptions of the file internal/events/webhooks/webhooks.go of the component Webhook Subscription. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-82954
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Dokploy up to 0.29.7. This issue affects the function writeTraefikConfigInPath of the file packages/server/src/utils/traefik/application.ts of the component Settings. The manipulation of the argument path results in path traversal. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-82922
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in ShopEx ECShop up to 2.5.1. This vulnerability affects the function flow_update_cart of the file /flow.php?step=update_cart. The manipulation of the argument rec_id leads to sql injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9