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

Comparison Overview

DERICHEBOURG MultiservicesDERICHEBOURG Multiservices
VS
Publicis SapientPublicis Sapient
DERICHEBOURG Multiservices

DERICHEBOURG Multiservices

undefined, Créteil, Île-de-France, 94000, FR

Last Update: 12/03/2026

View Profile
757/1000Fair

DERICHEBOURG Multiservices is an operator of services to companies and local authorities. Present in 6 countries on three continents, in 2022 the group employed 42,900 members of staff.

NAICS:541
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:5,499
Subsidiaries:24
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Publicis Sapient

Publicis Sapient

40 Water St, Boston, Massachusetts, US, 02109

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://publicissapient.com/
797/1000Fair

Publicis Sapient is a technology company that provides enterprise AI platforms and services. With over 30 years of digital business transformation experience, we enable enterprise clients to transform how they operate and serve their customers, unlocking new value and e...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:25,723
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
DERICHEBOURG Multiservices

DERICHEBOURG Multiservices

-
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
Publicis Sapient

Publicis Sapient

-
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 Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for DERICHEBOURG Multiservices in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Publicis Sapient has 6.54% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - DERICHEBOURG Multiservices (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DERICHEBOURG Multiservices 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 - Publicis Sapient (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Publicis Sapient 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...
DERICHEBOURG Multiservices

DERICHEBOURG Multiservices

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Publicis Sapient

Publicis Sapient

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
TRE1777710220

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-48777
SUMMARY

FileBrowser Quantum is a free, self-hosted, web-based file manager. Versions prior to 1.3.2-stable, 1.4.0-beta and 1.4.1-beta are vulnerable to Path Traversal through the publicPatchHandler in backend/http/public.go which joins user-controlled fromPath and toPath body fields with the trusted d.share.Path BEFORE the downstream sanitizer runs. Because filepath.Join collapses .. segments during the join, the sanitizer in resourcePatchHandler never sees the traversal and the move/copy/rename operates on a path outside the shared directory. The same root-cause pattern was patched for the bulk DELETE endpoint as CVE-2026-44542 (GHSA-fwj3-42wh-8673), but the PATCH handler with the identical pattern was not updated. A public share link with AllowModify=true is sufficient to exploit this. Anyone holding such a link can move, copy, or rename arbitrary files within the share owner's source root. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.3.3-stable and 1.4.2-beta.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
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: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-2026-47750
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the GLOBAL opcode handler. The issue was caused by missing validation when searching for newline-delimited fields. A crafted .ckpt file without the expected newline could cause the parser to use -1 as a copy length, resulting in immediate heap corruption. The attack requires the victim or application to load a .ckpt file from an untrusted source, such as a downloaded model from a model sharing site. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by following these instructions: do not load .ckpt checkpoint files from untrusted sources, and prefer trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
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
CVE-2026-47747
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the BINUNICODE opcode handler. The issue was caused by sign confusion on the opcode length field. A crafted .ckpt file could trigger memcpy with a very large length derived from a negative signed value, causing immediate heap corruption. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by only loading .ckpt checkpoint files from trusted sources and preferring trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
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
CVE-2026-46448
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Nova before 33.0.2, the server create API does not strip certain hint data. The resulting instance has no Placement allocation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
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
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-22313
SUMMARY

The device has a webserver that exposes a REST API authenticated with a token on the management network. By exploiting an OS command injection vulnerability an authenticated attacker can send arbitrary commands to the device that are executed with administrative permissions by the underlying operating system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3