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

Comparison Overview

Goosehead InsuranceGoosehead Insurance
VS
ChubbChubb
Goosehead Insurance

Goosehead Insurance

1500 Solana Blvd, Westlake, 76262, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
593/1000Very Poor

Goosehead Insurance is an independent personal lines insurance company serving the continental United States. We take pride in providing the power of choice to our clients for all their insurance needs. We shop among 200+ insurance companies to find the best policies at...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:3,834
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2
Chubb

Chubb

Bärengasse 32, CH-8001, CH

Last Update: 07/10/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.chubb.com/
826/1000Good

Chubb is a world leader in insurance. With operations in 54 countries and territories, Chubb provides commercial and personal property and casualty insurance, personal accident and supplemental health insurance, reinsurance and life insurance to a diverse group of clien...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:42,030
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Goosehead Insurance

Goosehead Insurance

-
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
Chubb

Chubb

-
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 Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Goosehead Insurance in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Chubb in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Goosehead Insurance (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Goosehead Insurance cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Chubb (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chubb 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...
Goosehead Insurance

Goosehead Insurance

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
GOO1362113101725
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
GOO2992929101325
Chubb

Chubb

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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