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

Comparison Overview

Degroof PetercamDegroof Petercam
VS
IIFL (India Infoline Group)IIFL (India Infoline Group)
Degroof Petercam

Degroof Petercam

Rue de l'Industrie 44, Brussels, 1040, BE

Last Update: 28/03/2026

View Profile
731/1000Moderate

Founded in 1871, Degroof Petercam is a Belgian-rooted reference investment house, built on more than 150 years of integrated financial knowledge. As responsible employer and investor, we contribute to sustainable growth. Private clients and families, entrepreneurs, corp...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:1,538
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
IIFL (India Infoline Group)

IIFL (India Infoline Group)

B Wing, Trade Centre, Kamala Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Off Senapati Bapat Marg,, Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN, 400013

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
783/1000Fair

IIFL group is one of India's largest diversified financial services conglomerates with three listed entities - IIFL Finance, IIFL Securities and 360 ONE Wealth & Asset Management. Founded in 1995 by Nirmal Jain as a small research house, today IIFL Group employs over 40...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:14,736
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Degroof Petercam

Degroof Petercam

-
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
IIFL (India Infoline Group)

IIFL (India Infoline 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 Degroof Petercam in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for IIFL (India Infoline Group) in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Degroof Petercam (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Degroof Petercam cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - IIFL (India Infoline Group) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

IIFL (India Infoline Group) 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...
Degroof Petercam

Degroof Petercam

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
DEG038251222
IIFL (India Infoline Group)

IIFL (India Infoline Group)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA