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

Comparison Overview

Defence BankDefence Bank
VS
Mascoma BankMascoma Bank
Defence Bank

Defence Bank

31 Queen Street, Melbourne, 3000, AU

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
722/1000Moderate

Defence Bank is a member-owned financial institution that was established in 1975 to provide banking services to the Australian Defence Force (ADF). We are the relationship bank of the ADF and are dedicated to supporting the unique financial needs of serving and reti...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:234
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Mascoma Bank

Mascoma Bank

Headquarters, 67 North Park Street, Lebanon, NH, US, 03766

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://mascoma.bank
722/1000Moderate

Mascoma Bank is a mutually owned bank and not for sale. With no shareholders to please, we are committed to remaining independent and to re-investing profits in our community. Our first priority has always been—and always will be—you, our customers. We are different tha...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:374
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Defence Bank

Defence Bank

-
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
Mascoma Bank

Mascoma Bank

-
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 Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Defence Bank in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mascoma Bank in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Defence Bank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Defence Bank cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Mascoma Bank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mascoma Bank 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...
Defence Bank

Defence Bank

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
DEF41029523
Mascoma Bank

Mascoma Bank

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
MAS652072925

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-11466
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in zilliztech deep-searcher up to 0.0.2. This affects the function CollectionRouter.invoke of the file deepsearcher/agent/collection_router.py. This manipulation of the argument kwargs causes improper access controls. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:N/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-11465
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in songquanpeng one-api up to 0.6.11-preview.7. Affected by this issue is the function Redeem of the file model/redemption.go of the component Redemption Code Top-Up Endpoint. The manipulation results in business logic errors. The attack may be launched remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.1)
CVSS2
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-11464
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in JeecgBoot up to 3.9.2. Affected by this vulnerability is the function queryPageList of the file src\main\java\org\jeecg\modules\system\controller\SysUserController.java of the component User List Endpoint. The manipulation of the argument salt leads to information disclosure. The attack may be initiated remotely. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. A fix is planned for the upcoming release.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.1)
CVSS2
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:S/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-11463
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in USCiLab Cereal up to 1.3.2. Affected is an unknown function of the component Shared Pointer Handler. Executing a manipulation can lead to type confusion. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
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: 2.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/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-2026-11462
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Chengdu Everbrite Network Technology BeikeShop up to 1.6.0.22. This impacts the function callback of the file plugins/Stripe/Controllers/StripeController.php of the component Stripe Plugin. Performing a manipulation of the argument Request results in improper authorization. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The patch is named 6719e0fc690ea0a998452092862e0f0a17c65968. It is suggested to install a patch to address this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-07
UPDATED
Date2026-06-07
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