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

Comparison Overview

ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)
VS
inDriveinDrive
ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)

ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)

21 Holborn Viaduct, London, GB

Last Update: 16/09/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.ensl.co.uk
686/1000Weak

ENSL offers a range of Artificial Intelligence Driven Cyber-security and digital transformation services. We have partnered with highly innovative and successful technology providers in order for us to develop unique, value oriented and forward thinking solutions for...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:8
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
inDrive

inDrive

Mountain View, 94040, US

Last Update: 03/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.inDrive.com
782/1000Fair

inDrive is a global mobility and urban services platform. The inDrive app has been downloaded over 400 million times, and has been the second most downloaded mobility app for the third consecutive year. In addition to ride-hailing, inDrive provides an expanding list of ...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:10,675
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)

ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)

-
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
inDrive

inDrive

-
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)

ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd) has 32.89% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for inDrive in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

inDrive 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...
ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)

ENSL Group (ENSL Cybertech Ltd)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ENS1789590929
inDrive

inDrive

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-95828
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in Mstfakts College-Management-System. This affects the function session_start of the file Front-end/server.php of the component Authentication. Executing a manipulation can lead to session fixiation. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product takes the approach of rolling releases to provide continious delivery. Therefore, version details for affected and updated releases are not available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-95820
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in anirbandutta9 College-Notes-Gallery up to 8c1cf3d98f30982d069c88ca172612c001eb39f6. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /dashboard/userprofile.php?section=admin1. Performing a manipulation of the argument image results in unrestricted upload. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. This product is using a rolling release to provide continious delivery. Therefore, no version details for affected nor updated releases are available. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
2.8
CVE-2026-61685
SUMMARY

ReactPress is a publishing system for React developers. Prior to version 3.7.0, ReactPress API list endpoints build TypeORM `QueryBuilder` conditions using unsanitized HTTP query parameter names as SQL column identifiers (e.g. `` `article.${key}` ``). TypeORM parameterizes values but not column names, allowing unauthenticated attackers to inject SQL through crafted query string keys. Version 3.7.0 contains a patch. As a workaround, allowlist allowed filter column names before interpolating into SQL.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
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
CVE-2026-57576
SUMMARY

plone.app.dexterity is a content-type system for the Plone content management system, and plone.app.contenttypes provides Plone’s Dexterity-based content types. Plone.app.dexterity versions through 3.2.2, 4.0.0 through 4.1.2, and 5.0.0, and plone.app.contenttypes versions through 3.0.11, 4.0.0 through 4.0.9, and 5.0.0 are vulnerable to denial of service because an authenticated user can create content with excessively long titles, descriptions, or uploaded-file names, causing Plone to become unresponsive and potentially making the resulting content difficult to edit or delete. The vulnerability is patched in plone.app.dexterity versions 3.2.3, 4.1.3, and 5.0.1, and in plone.app.contenttypes versions 3.0.12, 4.0.10, and 5.0.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-18176
SUMMARY

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8