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

Comparison Overview

Friendly CareFriendly Care
VS
Glenmark PharmaceuticalsGlenmark Pharmaceuticals
Friendly Care

Friendly Care

N/A

Last Update: 16/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://friendlycareinc.com
651/1000Weak

NAICS:3254
NAICS Definition:Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
Employees:77
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Glenmark Pharmaceuticals

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals

Glenmark House, B.D.Sawant Marg,, Chakala, Andheri (East), Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN, 400099

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile
650/1000Weak

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited is a research-led, global organization committed to enriching lives. Innovation is deeply embedded in Glenmark’s culture; it is how we differentiate ourselves in our key markets and create greater value for our stakeholders. In our jou...

NAICS:3254
NAICS Definition:Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
Employees:14,777
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Friendly Care

Friendly Care

-
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
Glenmark Pharmaceuticals

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals

-
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 Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

Friendly Care has 30.56% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Friendly Care (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Friendly Care cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Glenmark Pharmaceuticals (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals 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...
Friendly Care

Friendly Care

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
FRI1776328117
Glenmark Pharmaceuticals

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
KOPGLE1777473227

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA