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

Comparison Overview

가비아 (Gabia)가비아 (Gabia)
VS
Canon EMEACanon EMEA
가비아 (Gabia)

가비아 (Gabia)

Daewangpankyo-ro 660 Bundang-gu, Uspace 1B 4F, Sungnam-si, Kyungki-do, KR, 463-400

Last Update: 28/09/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://careers.gabia.com
678/1000Weak

가비아 제1의 가치는 자주성입니다. 가비아의 모든 서비스는 가비아인이 직접 만듭니다.  도메인 등록법을 독학해, 1998년 국내 최초로 도메인 사업을 시작했고, 2008년에는 가비아만의 원천 기술로 기업용 메일을 만들었습니다. 그리고 20여 명의 개발자가 3년을 연구해 2013년 g클라우드를 출시했습니다. 개발된 서비스를 운영하고 안전하게 지키는 일도 우리 힘으로 합니다.  그렇게 24년간 100만여 고객을 직접 맞이했고,  도메인 시장점유율 1위, 하이웍스 시장점유율 1위,...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:212
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Canon EMEA

Canon EMEA

4 Roundwood Avenue, Stockley Park, Uxbridge, GB, UB11 1AF

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.canon-europe.com
778/1000Fair

We are Canon Europe. We are the world's best imaging company. This page represents our offices in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Founded in 1937, the desire to continuously innovate has kept Canon at the forefront of imaging excellence throughout its 85-year histo...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:11,817
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
가비아 (Gabia)

가비아 (Gabia)

-
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
Canon EMEA

Canon EMEA

-
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)

가비아 (Gabia) has 31.51% fewer 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 Canon EMEA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - 가비아 (Gabia) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

가비아 (Gabia) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Canon EMEA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Canon EMEA 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...
가비아 (Gabia)

가비아 (Gabia)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
GAB1790591686
Canon EMEA

Canon EMEA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-89322
SUMMARY

Vault and Vault Enterprise did not consistently evaluate ACL policies against the canonical form of resource and policy names. This may allow an authenticated user with delegated permissions to bypass an explicit deny restriction and access a protected resource or assign a denied policy, potentially leading to privilege escalation. This vulnerability (CVE-2026-89322) is fixed in Vault Community Edition 2.1.2, and Vault Enterprise 2.1.2, 1.21.12, 1.20.17, and 1.19.23.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-07
UPDATED
Date2026-10-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.2
CVE-2026-107314
SUMMARY

pgjdbc, the PostgreSQL JDBC Driver, versions 42.7.11 through 42.7.13 enforce no restriction when the requireAuth connection property excludes all six authentication methods the driver knows, for example requireAuth=!password,!md5,!gss,!sspi,!scram-sha-256,!none. The driver then accepts any method the server asks for, including cleartext password authentication. A value without a method in it, such as requireAuth=, (a single comma), is affected the same way. An attacker positioned between the application and its server can ask for cleartext password authentication and receive the database password. A positive list such as requireAuth=scram-sha-256, and a partial exclusion such as requireAuth=!password,!md5, are enforced correctly. The property has no default value, so a deployment that does not set it is not affected. 42.7.14 fixes the problem: such a connection is refused with SQLState 08004, and a value without a method in it is rejected as invalid.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-07
UPDATED
Date2026-10-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-107285
SUMMARY

The AsyncHttpClient (AHC) library allows Java applications to easily execute HTTP requests and asynchronously process HTTP responses. Prior to 3.0.12 and 2.16.1, a proxied ws request is carried through CONNECT, but NettyRequestFactory.newNettyRequest and requestUri decide whether to attach proxy authentication and an absolute-form target only from whether the URI is secure. Because ws is not marked secure, the tunneled WebSocket upgrade sent to the origin includes the proxy's Proxy-Authorization value. Basic credentials are directly recoverable and Digest responses can be replayed or cracked offline. This issue is fixed in versions 3.0.12 and 2.16.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-07
UPDATED
Date2026-10-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-107284
SUMMARY

The AsyncHttpClient (AHC) library allows Java applications to easily execute HTTP requests and asynchronously process HTTP responses. Prior to 3.0.12 and 2.16.1, WebSocketHandler.upgrade aborts a handshake whose Sec-WebSocket-Accept value is missing or invalid but continues into pipeline installation and onOpen delivery. Frames coalesced with the invalid 101 response can be decoded and delivered from a peer that did not prove the handshake, although the request future fails and the channel closes. This issue is fixed in versions 3.0.12 and 2.16.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-07
UPDATED
Date2026-10-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-107283
SUMMARY

The AsyncHttpClient (AHC) library allows Java applications to easily execute HTTP requests and asynchronously process HTTP responses. Prior to 3.0.12 and 2.16.1, Realm.Builder generates the HTTP Digest client nonce with ThreadLocalRandom rather than a cryptographically secure random source. Digest relies on an unpredictable cnonce to resist chosen-plaintext and credential precomputation attacks, so an observer able to infer generator state can reduce the protection of the authentication exchange. This issue is fixed in versions 3.0.12 and 2.16.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-07
UPDATED
Date2026-10-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2