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

Comparison Overview

Devoteam | Cyber TrustDevoteam | Cyber Trust
VS
IBMIBM
Devoteam | Cyber Trust

Devoteam | Cyber Trust

73 Rue Anatole France, Levallois-Perret, 92300, FR

Last Update: 10/02/2026

View Profile

Devoteam Cyber Trust is the cybersecurity specialist arm of the Devoteam Group. With our 1000+ experts located across EMEA, Encompassing a range of cybersecurity services from GRC and Digital Identity through to managed security. Cyber Trust guides organisations securel...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:349
Subsidiaries:10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
IBM

IBM

International Business Machines Corp., Armonk, New York, 10504, US

Last Update: 13/08/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
http://www.ibm.com
373/1000Critical

At IBM, we do more than work. We create. We create as technologists, developers, and engineers. We create with our partners. We create with our competitors. If you're searching for ways to make the world work better through technology and infrastructure, software and co...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:336,062
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
10
Known data breaches
15
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Devoteam | Cyber Trust

Devoteam | Cyber Trust

-
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
IBM

IBM

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Devoteam | Cyber Trust in 2026.

Incidents

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

IBM has 870.87% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Devoteam | Cyber Trust (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Devoteam | Cyber Trust cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

IBM 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...
Devoteam | Cyber Trust

Devoteam | Cyber Trust

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
IBM

IBM

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
IBM1786584530
🔒 Incident : Breach
IBM1785357547
🔒 Incident : Breach
IBM1785321873

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66591
SUMMARY

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in David Lingren Media LIbrary Assistant allows Stored XSS. This issue affects Media LIbrary Assistant: from n/a through 3.39.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-66589
SUMMARY

Missing Authorization vulnerability in Kings Plugins B2BKing allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects B2BKing: from n/a through 5.2.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
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:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-27365
SUMMARY

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in PublishPress PublishPress Series allows Stored XSS. This issue affects PublishPress Series: from n/a through 2.17.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.7
CVE-2026-73974
SUMMARY

linuxfabrik-lib provides Python modules for database access, caching, shell execution, and API integrations, and Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins uses its shared testing helper across check plugins. Prior to linuxfabrik-lib 6.1.0 and Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins 7.0.0, lib.lftest.test() treated the first or second element of a --test CSV argument as a filesystem path and returned the file contents as simulated standard output or standard error without path confinement. The hidden but production-accessible --test argument was accepted by sudo-authorized plugins, so an attacker controlling the nagios or icinga account could use check-plugins/deb-updates/deb-updates with its default QUERY=1 to disclose every line of a root-readable file. Approximately 22 other plugins exposed filtered content or a root file existence and readability oracle through the same helper, while check-plugins/network-bonding/network-bonding and check-plugins/openstack-swift-stat/openstack-swift-stat had direct read paths that bypassed the helper. The library fix confines fixture reads to the invoking plugin's unit-test directory and refuses unsafe anchors, and the plugin fix routes the two bypasses through that helper. These issues are fixed in linuxfabrik-lib 6.1.0 and Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins 7.0.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-73973
SUMMARY

Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins provides monitoring plugins for Icinga, Nagios, and related systems. Prior to version 7.0.0, check-plugins/logfile/logfile accepted a free-form --filename path and opened it as root when invoked through the shipped nagios or icinga sudoers allowlist, without confining the resolved path to /var/log. An attacker who controls the monitoring account can select a root-readable file such as /etc/shadow and use --warning-regex . while leaving SUPPRESS_OUTPUT false, causing each nonempty line to be collected in warn_matches and returned through lib.base.oao(). The vulnerable flow passes the expanded scan_path directly to open(), and neither real-path containment nor an allowlist protects the sink. The same fix also confines mysql-logfile and openvpn-client-list paths, allows only documented log roots, and resolves symlinks and parent-directory traversal before checking containment. This issue is fixed in version 7.0.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8