Comparison Overview

DLL

VS

Old Mutual

DLL

Vestdijk 51, None, Eindhoven, Netherlands, NL, 5611 CA
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 700 and 749

DLL is a global asset finance company for equipment and technology with a managed portfolio of more than EUR 44 billion. Founded in 1969 and headquartered in Eindhoven, the Netherlands, DLL provides financial solutions within the Agriculture, Clean Energy, Construction, Food, Healthcare, Industrial, Office Equipment, Technology, and Transportation industries in more than 25 countries. The company partners with equipment manufacturers, dealers, distributors, as well as end users, to enable businesses to access equipment, technology, and software more easily. DLL is committed to a more sustainable future for the environment and the communities in which it operates. To advance on this commitment, the company has embedded sustainability into its business strategy. DLL combines customer focus and industry knowledge to provide financial solutions for the complete asset life cycle, including commercial finance, retail finance and used equipment finance. DLL is a wholly owned subsidiary of Rabobank Group.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 6,112
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Old Mutual

107 Rivonia Rd, Johannesburg, Gauteng, undefined, ZA
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

Old Mutual Limited is a listed company on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange and has secondary listings on the London, Malawi, Namibia and Zimbabwe stock exchanges. As a Pan-African financial services company, we are focused on Africa, her needs and her people. Together with you, we have educated our children, given more homes warmth and light, empowered small businesses and improved infrastructure in Africa. Our story will continue #WithAfricaForAfrica.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 12,699
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dllgroup.jpeg
DLL
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/old-mutual.jpeg
Old Mutual
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
DLL
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Old Mutual
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for DLL in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Old Mutual in 2025.

Incident History — DLL (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DLL cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Old Mutual (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Old Mutual cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dllgroup.jpeg
DLL
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/old-mutual.jpeg
Old Mutual
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Old Mutual company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to DLL company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

DLL company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Old Mutual company has not reported any.

In the current year, Old Mutual company and DLL company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Old Mutual company nor DLL company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

DLL company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Old Mutual company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Old Mutual company nor DLL company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither DLL company nor Old Mutual company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither DLL nor Old Mutual holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

DLL company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Old Mutual company.

Old Mutual company employs more people globally than DLL company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither DLL nor Old Mutual holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither DLL nor Old Mutual holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither DLL nor Old Mutual holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither DLL nor Old Mutual holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither DLL nor Old Mutual holds HIPAA certification.

Neither DLL nor Old Mutual holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H