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

Comparison Overview

Gazprom NeftGazprom Neft
VS
EcopetrolEcopetrol
Gazprom Neft

Gazprom Neft

ул. Почтамтская, д. 3-5,, Санкт-Петербург, 190000,, RU

Last Update: 21/03/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.gazprom-neft.com
831/1000Good

Gazprom Neft is a technological leader in Russia’s oil and gas market. We produce high-quality fuels, lubricants and bitumens for business and retail customers, refuel aircraft, and are developing our filling-stations network. New technologies mean we are constantly imp...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:5,905
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Ecopetrol

Ecopetrol

Cra. 13 No. 36-24, Bogotá, ----, CO

Last Update: 20/07/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.ecopetrol.com.co
664/1000Weak

Ecopetrol (NYSE: EC) es la compañía más grande en Colombia y uno de los principales grupos de energía de Latinoamérica. Cuenta con más de 18.000 empleados y es responsable del 60% de la producción de hidrocarburos en Colombia. Es propietaria de las dos refinerías del Co...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:12,683
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Gazprom Neft

Gazprom Neft

-
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
Ecopetrol

Ecopetrol

-
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 Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gazprom Neft in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

Ecopetrol has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Gazprom Neft (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gazprom Neft 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 - Ecopetrol (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ecopetrol 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...
Gazprom Neft

Gazprom Neft

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Ecopetrol

Ecopetrol

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
ECO1784557630
🔒 Incident : Breach
ECO1784348677

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19756
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Dromara lamp-cloud up to 5.10.0. This affects an unknown part of the file DefGenProjectController.java of the component Code Generator. Such manipulation of the argument outputDir/parent/projectPrefix leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-19753
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Model Context Protocol mcp-rdf-explorer 1.0.0. Affected is the function explore_url of the file src/mcp-rdf-explorer/server.py of the component MCP Server. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-73843
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.2 and 1.1.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go served caller-facing management APIs on the externally reachable agent listener without authentication, allowing network-reachable attackers to invoke /api/proxy/ and /api/exec/ operations, proxy the data-plane Kubernetes API, and execute commands in workload pods in multi-cluster deployments. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.2 and 1.1.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-73842
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go exposed /api/proxy/, /api/exec/, and /api/wirelogs/ on an internal listener without requiring a client certificate or token, allowing any network-reachable caller to read tenant Kubernetes Secrets, mutate workloads, and execute commands across connected data planes. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-73841
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. From 1.2.0-rc.1 until 1.2.0, internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/exec.go and internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/wirelogs.go authorize component:exec and wirelogs:view using the caller-supplied project query parameter instead of comp.Spec.Owner.ProjectName, allowing a user with a project-scoped grant to execute commands in and read wirelogs from components owned by other projects in the same namespace. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8