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

Comparison Overview

FuturePlan by AscensusFuturePlan by Ascensus
VS
Lars Larsen GroupLars Larsen Group
FuturePlan by Ascensus

FuturePlan by Ascensus

undefined, Dresher, Pennsylvania, 19025, US

Last Update: 19/12/2025

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

We stand as a Category of One partner in the TPA space. As a leading third party administrator for America’s leading recordkeepers and advisors, we are the only TPA offering a full spectrum of creative plan design, strategic consulting, IRS and DOL regulatory compliance...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:1
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Lars Larsen Group

Lars Larsen Group

Randersvej 2.c, 8600 Silkeborg, DK

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
771/1000Fair

Lars Larsen Group is owned by the Brunsborg family, descendants of JYSK founder Lars Larsen. The Group owns companies within a number of business areas including furniture, interior design, restaurants and hotels, and is also an active investor in equities, funds, and r...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:16,177
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
FuturePlan by Ascensus

FuturePlan by Ascensus

-
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
Lars Larsen Group

Lars Larsen 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

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FuturePlan by Ascensus in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lars Larsen Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - FuturePlan by Ascensus (X = Date, Y = Severity)

FuturePlan by Ascensus cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Lars Larsen Group 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...
FuturePlan by Ascensus

FuturePlan by Ascensus

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Lars Larsen Group

Lars Larsen Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA