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

Comparison Overview

CSE ICON, Inc.CSE ICON, Inc.
VS
ADNOC GroupADNOC Group
CSE ICON, Inc.

CSE ICON, Inc.

2829 Technology Forest Blvd, The Woodlands, 77381, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://www.cse-icon.com
697/1000Weak

CSE ICON is a technology and integration services organization focused on the design, development and implementation of Operations Technologies and Information Systems. Our mission is to bring people and data together to create a better world. We help automate and contr...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:58
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
ADNOC Group

ADNOC Group

Corniche Road, Abu Dhabi, 898, AE

Last Update: 10/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.adnoc.ae
784/1000Fair

We are one of the world's leading energy producers, and a primary catalyst for Abu Dhabi’s growth and diversification. We operate across the entire hydrocarbon value chain, through a network of fully-integrated businesses, with interests that range from exploration, p...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:49,223
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
CSE ICON, Inc.

CSE ICON, Inc.

-
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
ADNOC Group

ADNOC 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 Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CSE ICON, Inc. in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ADNOC Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - CSE ICON, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CSE ICON, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

ADNOC 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...
CSE ICON, Inc.

CSE ICON, Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
CSE340092125
ADNOC Group

ADNOC Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
ADN223331222

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-22061
SUMMARY

Trident versions v25.02.1 through v26.06.1 are susceptible to a vulnerability that could allow an authenticated attacker with access to debug logs to view LUKS passphrases or SMB Active Directory credentials.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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-2026-108269
SUMMARY

Remote Attestation TLS Clients provides multi-language utilities for verifying attested TLS connections. Prior to 0.5.0, the Rust and Go RA-TLS challenge verifiers accepted quote ReportData that was bound to the certificate public key and client nonce but not to the active TLS session before permitting application traffic. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing the clients to accept an attacker-terminated connection as the attested enclave. This issue is fixed in 0.5.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-108268
SUMMARY

Enclave OS Virtual runs container workloads inside confidential virtual machines with end-to-end attestation. Prior to tdx-v0.2.43 and tdx-gpu-v0.6.27, the TDX/GPU RA-TLS certificate issuer placed the certificate public-key hash and client nonce in quote ReportData but omitted a value bound to the active TLS session. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing a relying party to accept an attacker-terminated connection as the attested enclave. This issue is fixed in tdx-v0.2.43 and tdx-gpu-v0.6.27.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-108267
SUMMARY

Privasys Go is a maintained fork of the Go programming language that adds RA-TLS support to crypto/tls. Prior to privasys-v0.5.1-go1.26.5, challenge-mode RA-TLS certificates bound quote ReportData to the certificate public key and client nonce but not to the active TLS session. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing a relying party to accept a handshake terminated by the attacker as an attested enclave connection. This issue is fixed in privasys-v0.5.1-go1.26.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-92705
SUMMARY

Aegisub is a cross-platform advanced subtitle editor. From 3.2.0 to 3.4.2, Aegisub automatically loads Automation scripts referenced by `Automation Scripts` metadata in `ASS` subtitle projects without asking whether the user trusts the scripts or their authors. An attacker can distribute a crafted `ASS` file together with a referenced malicious Automation script, and opening the `AS`  file executes arbitrary code with the privileges of the Aegisub process. From 3.4.0 to 3.4.2, inconsistent handling of embedded `NUL` characters between extension validation and filesystem operations additionally allows a crafted `ASS/Lua` polyglot to reference and execute itself as a single-file variant. The vulnerability is fixed in Aegisub 3.5.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8