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

Comparison Overview

ERIELL GroupERIELL Group
VS
Bharat Petroleum Corporation LimitedBharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
ERIELL Group

ERIELL Group

ул. Гавхар, 151а, Ташкент, 100081, UZ

Last Update: 01/06/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.eriell.com/
779/1000Fair

ERIELL, an international oilfield service group provides well drilling and workover services to leading oil and gas companies in the Central and Southern Asia, and Middle East. ERIELL Group has a fleet of more than 70 up-to-date drilling units, from mobile units to sup...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:742
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Mumbai, IN

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
778/1000Fair

Fortune Global 500 Company, Bharat Petroleum is the second largest Indian Oil Marketing Company and one of the premier integrated energy companies in India, engaged in refining of crude oil and marketing of petroleum products, with a significant presence in the upstream...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:22,090
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ERIELL Group

ERIELL Group

-
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
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

-
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 Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

ERIELL Group has 55.16% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - ERIELL Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ERIELL Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited 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...
ERIELL Group

ERIELL Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
SECERI1780323934
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1