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

Comparison Overview

CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)
VS
European CommissionEuropean Commission
CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)

CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)

6, avenue Edouard Herriot , VALENCE, 26000, FR

Last Update: 11/03/2026

View Profile
760/1000Fair

Travailler à l’Assurance Maladie, c’est s’engager au sein d’un collectif animé par la culture du résultat, où chacun met ses compétences au service de nombreux projets pour protéger la santé de plus de 60 millions d’assurés.

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:124
Subsidiaries:113
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
European Commission

European Commission

Rue de la loi, Brussels, 1049, BE

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://commission.europa.eu
740/1000Moderate

The Commission represents and upholds the interests of the EU as a whole, and is independent of national governments. The European Commission prepares legislation for adoption by the Council (representing the member countries) and the Parliament (representing the citiz...

NAICS:92
NAICS Definition:Public Administration
Employees:41,562
Subsidiaries:28
12-month incidents
6
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)

CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)

-
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
European Commission

European Commission

-
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 Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Avg (This Year)

European Commission has 476.92% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - European Commission (X = Date, Y = Severity)

European Commission 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...
CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)

CPAM de la Drôme (Assurance Maladie)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
European Commission

European Commission

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
AQUEUR1775299151
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
AQUEUR1775205235
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
EUR1774635987

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-63261
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). A low-privileged authenticated user can send a specially crafted request to a Kibana machine learning feature, causing the server to exhaust available memory and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63260
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). An authenticated attacker with low-privilege access can trigger a denial of service condition in Kibana by sending a specially crafted, oversized request payload. Processing this user-supplied input requires resource-intensive memory allocation that can exhaust the available heap memory in the Kibana process, causing it to crash and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63259
SUMMARY

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) in Kibana can lead to information disclosure via user-supplied identifiers that reference scheduled query result data from Kibana Spaces the requester is not authorized to access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63145
SUMMARY

Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to integrity compromise of Machine Learning audit and notification records via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). A vulnerability exists in Kibana's Machine Learning functionality where a Machine Learning management endpoint performs an insufficient authorization check. The endpoint validates only a coarse privilege level but does not verify that the requesting user has access to the specific Machine Learning job or notification resources provided in the request. As a result, a low-privileged user with Machine Learning access in any Kibana space can manipulate Machine Learning audit and notification records for arbitrary jobs—including jobs in other spaces or belonging to other users—by leveraging Kibana's internally elevated credentials to write to restricted Machine Learning system indices that the user cannot access directly.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63144
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Recursion (CWE-674) in Elasticsearch can lead to denial of service via a specially crafted search request submitted by a low-privileged authenticated user. A user with read-level index access can submit a request that triggers unbounded recursive processing within the Elasticsearch query evaluation component, causing a fatal error that terminates the affected node. In single-node deployments, this results in complete service outage; in multi-node clusters, it causes repeated node restarts and sustained availability degradation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8