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

Comparison Overview

Emapta LatamEmapta Latam
VS
iEnergizeriEnergizer
Emapta Latam

Emapta Latam

Cra. 16 # 97- 46, Bogota, CO

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://careers.emapta.com
753/1000Fair

We prioritize diversity, inclusion, and equality in our workforce.    We believe that a diverse team fuels innovation and drives success. We embrace individuals' unique backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives, fostering an environment where everyone feels valued and...

NAICS:541615
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
iEnergizer

iEnergizer

N/A

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
777/1000Fair

iEnergizer is a leading Business Process Outsourcing provider (“BPO”) of customer management solutions dedicated to delivering performance while actively supporting and advocating our client’s brand. iEnergizer helps our Partners acquire, support, retain, and grow their...

NAICS:541615
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:18,308
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Emapta Latam

Emapta Latam

-
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
iEnergizer

iEnergizer

-
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 Outsourcing and Offshoring Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Emapta Latam in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Outsourcing and Offshoring Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for iEnergizer in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Emapta Latam (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Emapta Latam 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 - iEnergizer (X = Date, Y = Severity)

iEnergizer 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...
Emapta Latam

Emapta Latam

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
iEnergizer

iEnergizer

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-81203
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple Online Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=login2. The manipulation of the argument email leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-80158
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the ipa_getkeytab module of the community.general Ansible collection. The module's bind_pw parameter, used to supply the LDAP simple-bind password when retrieving a Kerberos keytab, is not declared with no_log, unlike the sibling password parameter in the same module. As a consequence, the supplied IPA/LDAP bind password is recorded in cleartext in the managed host's system journal/syslog (the module's "Invoked with" record), is included in the module's return values and verbose (-v) output, and is displayed in Automation Controller / AWX job output. The password is additionally passed on the command line to the ipa-getkeytab helper (as --bindpw <value>), exposing it in the process list to local users while the command runs. An attacker able to read these logs, job output, or the process table can obtain the directory bind credential, potentially compromising the accounts and objects that credential can access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
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-2026-75340
SUMMARY

The device metadata import interface /device/instance/{productId}/property-metadata/import of jetlinks community 2.11 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75338
SUMMARY

disconf (Distributed Configuration Management Platform) 2.6.36 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control. The config-fetching APIs /api/config/item, /api/config/file, /api/config/list and /api/config/simple/list are exposed without authentication. The LoginInterceptor explicitly whitelists these four paths, so any anonymous attacker can read every configuration item and configuration file managed by the config center.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75336
SUMMARY

Funiture 1.0.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the backend tool interfaces /sys/tool/select.json and /sys/tool/update.json.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA