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

Comparison Overview

FiservFiserv
VS
Samsung SDSSamsung SDS
Fiserv

Fiserv

600 N Vel R Phillips Ave, Milwaukee, 53203, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.fiserv.com
793/1000Fair

Fiserv, Inc. (NASDAQ: FISV) is a global technology leader committed to delivering innovative and transformative financial services experiences for clients in more than 100 countries.

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:34,110
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
3
Samsung SDS

Samsung SDS

Samsung SDS 125, Olympic-ro 35-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05510, KR

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.samsungsds.com
778/1000Fair

Samsung SDS provides cloud computing and digital logistics services. We build an optimized cloud environment with Samsung Cloud Platform specialized for businesses, provide all-in-one management service based on 38 years of expertise in each industry, and boost work eff...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:14,835
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Fiserv

Fiserv

-
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
Samsung SDS

Samsung SDS

-
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)

Fiserv has 35.14% more 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 Samsung SDS in 2026.

Incidents

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

Fiserv cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Samsung SDS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Samsung SDS 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...
Fiserv

Fiserv

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
PHISHE1786703569
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
CENFIS1774391970
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
FIS01771122
Samsung SDS

Samsung SDS

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-84483
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo through commit 9c39d8c8 contains an incomplete authentication bypass in encryptPass.json.php that allows unauthenticated attackers to compute valid HMAC tokens using the public site URL and current time. Attackers can forge authentication tokens by computing hash_hmac with the site's base URL as the key and submit arbitrary passwords to receive encrypted hashes, enabling offline precomputation attacks against stolen password databases.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-84482
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo through commit 9c39d8c8 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the get_domain() and isSameDomain() functions that fail to properly validate referer origins. Attackers can forge requests from sibling subdomains or unparseable long-gTLD origins to perform administrative ObjectYPT writes including live server configuration changes.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-84481
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo through 30.0 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MobileManager plugin getConfiguration endpoint that returns sensitive configuration data to unauthenticated visitors. Attackers can send an unauthenticated GET request to plugin/MobileManager/getConfiguration.json.php to obtain TLS private key file paths, socket configuration details, platform version, and debug flags enabling further targeted attacks.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-84480
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo fails to validate password recovery token expiration in userRecoverPassSave.json.php, allowing attackers to use expired tokens to reset account passwords indefinitely. Attackers who obtain a recovery token can use it at any time to change the target account's password and gain full account access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-84479
SUMMARY

WWBN AVideo (current e01e41ecc and earlier) makes three login-time security controls depend solely on the client-supplied User-Agent header. The isAVideoEncoder()/isAVideoMobileApp() checks match HTTP_USER_AGENT against a hardcoded literal ("AVideoEncoder"/"AVideoMobileApp") with no IP check or shared secret. An attacker who submits valid credentials and sets User-Agent: AVideoEncoder bypasses two-factor authentication, skips brute-force captcha escalation, and avoids being recorded in the login/device audit history. No patch is available at the time of publication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-01
UPDATED
Date2026-09-01
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9