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

Comparison Overview

Fractal + Google Cloud PartnershipFractal + Google Cloud Partnership
VS
IBMIBM
Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership

Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership

One World Trade Center, New York, NY 10007, US

Last Update: 15/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://fractal.ai/
751/1000Fair

Fractal is a Google Cloud Partner and one of the most prominent providers of Artificial Intelligence to Fortune 500® companies. Our vision is to power every human decision in the enterprise and bring AI, engineering, and design to help the world's most admired companies...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
IBM

IBM

International Business Machines Corp., Armonk, New York, 10504, US

Last Update: 01/09/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
http://www.ibm.com
365/1000Critical

At IBM, we do more than work. We create. We create as technologists, developers, and engineers. We create with our partners. We create with our competitors. If you're searching for ways to make the world work better through technology and infrastructure, software and co...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:336,062
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
11
Known data breaches
15
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership

Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership

-
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
IBM

IBM

-
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)

No incidents recorded for Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership in 2026.

Incidents

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

IBM has 967.96% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership 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 - IBM (X = Date, Y = Severity)

IBM 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...
Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership

Fractal + Google Cloud Partnership

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
IBM

IBM

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
IBM1788298895
🔒 Incident : Breach
IBM1786584530
🔒 Incident : Breach
IBM1785357547

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8