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

Comparison Overview

DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbHDDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH
VS
BDO USABDO USA
DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH

DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH

N/A

Last Update: 02/12/2025

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.de.ddb.com/
749/1000Moderate

Die DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH ist Teil des amerikanischen Omnicom-Konzerns, der in mehr als 100 Ländern vertreten ist und dabei mehr als 70.000 Mitarbeiter in ca. 1.500 Kommunikationsagenturen unter seinem Dach vereint. Die DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH ...

NAICS:541
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:11
Subsidiaries:113
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
BDO USA

BDO USA

330 N Wabash Ave, Chicago, IL, US, 60611

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.bdo.com
775/1000Fair

At BDO, our success is measured by what we achieve together. As a leading provider of audit, tax, and advisory services, we put people first cultivating a conscious, caring corporate culture that empowers our professionals and clients to thrive. Our commitment to excell...

NAICS:5412
NAICS Definition:Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll Services
Employees:11,077
Subsidiaries:57
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH

DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH

-
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
BDO USA

BDO USA

-
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 Accounting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Accounting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BDO USA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - BDO USA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BDO USA 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...
DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH

DDB Germany Group of Companies GmbH

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
BDO USA

BDO USA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
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:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9