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

Comparison Overview

FGV TransportesFGV Transportes
VS
La Poste GroupeLa Poste Groupe
FGV Transportes

FGV Transportes

Rua Barão de Itambi, 60, Rio de Janeiro, 22231000, BR

Last Update: 28/11/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://transportes.fgv.br/
751/1000Fair

A Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV, ao longo de 76 anos de atuação, vem construindo uma trajetória de excelência na história do país nas áreas de administração, economia, direito, ciência social, matemática, pesquisa histórica e documentação. Atualmente, a FGV é o 3º melho...

NAICS:47
NAICS Definition:Transportation and Warehousing
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
La Poste Groupe

La Poste Groupe

9 rue du colonel Avia, Paris, FR, 75015

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
746/1000Moderate

Premier réseau commercial de proximité en France, le groupe La Poste est organisé en 4 branches d’activité : Services-Courrier-Colis, Banque et Assurance, Distributeur physique et numérique, GeoPost/DPDGroup pour l'international. Présent dans plus de 63 pays, sur 5 cont...

NAICS:47
NAICS Definition:Transportation and Warehousing
Employees:55,442
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
FGV Transportes

FGV Transportes

-
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
La Poste Groupe

La Poste Groupe

-
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 Transportation, Logistics, Supply Chain and Storage Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FGV Transportes in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Transportation, Logistics, Supply Chain and Storage Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for La Poste Groupe in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - FGV Transportes (X = Date, Y = Severity)

FGV Transportes 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 - La Poste Groupe (X = Date, Y = Severity)

La Poste Groupe cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
FGV Transportes

FGV Transportes

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
La Poste Groupe

La Poste Groupe

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
LA-BAK1767116583
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
LAP0711722

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-78147
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in ggml-org llama.cpp bec4772f6. The impacted element is the function deserialize_tensor of the file ggml/src/ggml-rpc/ggml-rpc.cpp of the component ggml-RPC Server. Performing a manipulation of the argument op/op_params results in deserialization. The attack may be initiated remotely. This vulnerability is distinct from CVE-2026-34159 (GHSA-j8rj-fmpv-wcxw, PR #20908), which only added a buffer==nullptr rejection in create_node() and does not validate op or op_params. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-23
UPDATED
Date2026-08-23
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: 6.9
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: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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-78145
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in CTFd up to 3.8.4. The affected element is the function _is_safe_url of the file CTFd/utils/validators/__init__.py. Such manipulation of the argument Next leads to open redirect. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The name of the patch is 5d8515842fd1ab2c3a9f2dde9ffca907aa334ea9. Upgrading the affected component is recommended.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-23
UPDATED
Date2026-08-23
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-78144
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in code-projects Barangay Resident Profiling Management System 1.0. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /boarders.php of the component Boarder Management Module. Such manipulation of the argument ID leads to authorization bypass. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-23
UPDATED
Date2026-08-23
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-2026-78143
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in code-projects Barangay Resident Profiling Management System 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the file residents.php of the component Resident Search Functionality. This manipulation of the argument Search causes sql injection. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-23
UPDATED
Date2026-08-23
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-2026-78142
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in code-projects Barangay Resident Profiling Management System 1.0. This impacts an unknown function of the file /archived_records.php of the component Restore/Delete. The manipulation of the argument resident_id results in authorization bypass. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-23
UPDATED
Date2026-08-23
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