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

Comparison Overview

DesjardinsDesjardins
VS
Banco de Crédito BCPBanco de Crédito BCP
Desjardins

Desjardins

100, rue des Commandeurs, Lévis, G6V 7N5, CA

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
632/1000Poor

Desjardins Group is the largest cooperative financial group in North America and the fifth largest cooperative financial group in the world, with assets of $435.8 billion as at March 31, 2024. It was named one of Canada's Best Employers by Forbes magazine and by Mediaco...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:43,222
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1
Banco de Crédito BCP

Banco de Crédito BCP

Calle Centenario 156, La Molina, Lima 12, PE

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
799/1000Fair

Somos el banco peruano que desde hace más de 130 años viene liderando el sistema financiero a nivel nacional. A lo largo de todo este tiempo hemos contribuido con el desarrollo económico de nuestro país, transformando planes en realidad. Todo esto es posible gracias a...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:23,773
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Desjardins

Desjardins

-
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
Banco de Crédito BCP

Banco de Crédito BCP

-
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)

Desjardins has 44.13% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Banco de Crédito BCP in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Desjardins (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Desjardins cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Banco de Crédito BCP (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Banco de Crédito BCP 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...
Desjardins

Desjardins

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
DESSK-DOL1770631353
🔒 Incident : Breach
DES1767941129
🔒 Incident : Breach
DES1767719603
Banco de Crédito BCP

Banco de Crédito BCP

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8